Labor Party, Liberal Party, Brexit Blair discussed on Talking Politics

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

What you just said kind of circular sort of had there been some kind of alliance. I wouldn't be able to fight that war. Which would have preserved aligns but there wasn't an alliance which meant he with his parliamentary majority. Could fight that will which makes healing that rift much much harder and we're still know far enough on from that. I think for any Liberal Democrats and like you say that bit of the Labor Party that considers blade the enemy could ally with Liberal Democrats on their mutual hatred of the Iraq Project. And that's no plas- in mind at all by progressive. It is interesting if you look at the history of this is is that foreign policy questions on questions of the Union as well Ongoing features of the complicated relationship not only between the Liberals on the Labor Party historically but between the Liberals and the Conservative Party as well. I mean if you're about to begin. The the end of the nineteenth century the beginning of the Twentieth Century. In you say well how do you get to a Liberal Party that is willing to offer that corporation we Labor that it did in one thousand nine hundred six? The necessary condition of that is that a significant part of the Liberal Party has gone off to the Conservatives over the question of home rule. How'd you then end up with somebody like Churchill in that? Radical Liberal government is because of the Conservatives profound disagreements about the free-trade question how is it the liberals blow apart during the first world war? It's over the questions about how the war should be prosecuted so actually faultlines around Britain's external in Tation to the rest of the world as well as the multinational state United Kingdom is fairly fundamental questions. That any of these coalitions have got provide some kind of coherent answer to you. Didn't mention the Greens. I didn't think that he in the speech. Nine hundred so there is a possibility that what we're seeing a shift in British European politics again. It really depends on the electoral system that that could be swayed the younger vectors for him. If they were given a free choice many more would vote green and that must be. Puff is progressive aligns and yet the. Green Party is much closer to the Kuban wing of Labor. I mean there's another possible rift opening up here on the progressive side is one of the reasons why. I think black has a case. He should be very careful if your labor about proportional representation because you could open the door not this label them governing coalition for Tennessee but a big labor green rift opening up nothing without addressing that. This still looks like it's is either coming from ten fifteen years ago or it's it's wishful in the context of now. I mean if you look at the problems of the center-left parties facing in Europe the German Social Democrats for example in a pretty significant part of their problem is the competition that now exists for the same kind of young middle class voters that they relied on in the past now. Voting for the the Green Party in that sense is it looks like the German Social Democrats have been displaced as the second party in in German politics by the Greens are now at the moment. Labor doesn't have that problem of pretty significant competition to its green left. Absolutely would I think under a system of proportional representation on the other bit just briefly because it's too big to discuss at length what it would be to re imagine an economy and a form of government that was suited to the Middle Part of the twentieth century and wasn't a relic of the Middle Part of the twentieth century. So sent let politicians have been saying this for about twenty years more since they noticed that there was a digital revolution. They were going to have to come up with an account with a future which recognized the changing character work of labor of sharing of ownership. So on there's nothing in bless speech to flesh it out. I'm sure probably he could summon up some think tanks to come up with some ideas still seems to me that the most interesting versions of those visions of the future are coming from the of the Labor Party. He doesn't like I mean I think. Pull MASON IN POST. Capitalism has a much more interesting account of what a future economy and future form of politics might look like from the point of view. The problem with it I think is not necessarily some of the core ideas but it seems completely wishful about the basic politics of winning and holding power but then goes back to his earlier argument. I mean it seems to me like he's going around in circles here. He wants both a conventional account of how a party like the party that he led governs with a majority of very twentieth century idea and ideas that are suited for the middle of the twenty first century. And I think you've got if you're GONNA do the second you gotta give up on the. I don't think he's if you're a Blairite April air follower. You have to accept that you can't have it both ways. You can't want it to be nineteen ninety-seven again with a philosophy seat for twenty twenty seven. I think twenty twenty seven. If it's new is really new. Yeah I mean I agree entirely. I mean I think this goes back in some sense to the way in which Blair fetish is is really newness. I think one of the things that was to me striking about the speech when he's talking about the future is how we really frames. That almost entirely in terms of Technology Carlson. It is not the respect. The white heat the technological revolution continental whether the Brexit was entirely missing from the the speech but it any substantial discussion of it. I mean that is a a future that has to now be worked out in quite literally. The United Kingdom is ripped up its previous constitutional relationship with the European Union with profound consequences for its own constitution. It's about changes economic relationship with the European Union. And it's doing so in a completely different geopolitical world than the one in which Blair became prime minister and these demands of the future. Knew that is new but this is not something that he's got anything to say about. Now I think in part by is because in some sense. This is past coming back. Is the past constitution coming back at something about pass? Geopolitical competition coming back is the question of basically having to reconsider. Fundamental trade relationships are coming back and then not the conduct questions the blaze mind I think is attracted to. He's attracted to the idea of the radical transformation of the president by these big forces. That mean that nothing is ever like. It was before at the same time though as you say being trapped in a narrative of well we can go back to me as prime minister and understand how I became the successful prime minister. I have that still has supposedly has guidance for the party. Despite the fact that on this the fundamental big future question for Britain is Britain over the next decade is how to reconfigure. Its its place in the world and its domestic politics relation to Brexit Blair. Entirely bet on the wrong outcome. I don't mean that any sense of the it was wrong to want to stay in the European Union but he he gambled that he in some sense he could stop the off after I after it happened and he was utterly defeated. The he doesn't seem to have anything to say about what the future of political response the low parties should be to. This changed political world. Maybe I'm saying the same thing but when I read the speech it says a new kind of government in a new kind of economy. It doesn't say it's not like how speech anyway. What the relationship is between the two? Does the new kind of economy generate new forms of government to new forms of government generate a new kind of economy and my feeling is that he still assumes the government. Leads on this. Somehow that you're somehow going to get a government that reconfigures the economy in a way that makes it Farah for the kind of people that Labor exist to protect but it never explains how the two and it's going to be a messy relationship. Connect to each other and I had the same thought which is Nebraska is. The thing is actually driving a really fundamental question about how the economy relates to form the government and have forms of government can account reconfigure the economy and in some senses camp. I mean that's the other thing that has to be some skepticism here about whether you can just do it. I mean it's it's fine to want to do it but is it really the case in the digital age? The government can reconfigure the economy. But the test is not GONNA BE BLAST. Test is going to be brexit and that she was seeing. I mean that's the way to talk about the other side of politics on. We seeing version of that argument being played. I inside the Conservative Party. Right now. This question. Let's don't make it a little bit. Cummings but this question about whether government really can drive the reconfiguration of the economy or whether the government actually is at the mercy of forces. It can't control basic real question of politics. We're seeing it. We're GONNA learn things about that but it's not going to be blessed lesson now. They clearly two aspects to these kind of dilemmas of the the government. Conservative government faces. The first is a domestic won't because this conservative leadership is taken the view not least because of the electoral geography behind his electoral victory. That some fairly fundamental things about the way in which the British domestic economy works of the change. They hoped that they can use the power. The state to change the regional distributional outcomes not the way that the British economy has worked for the last at least the last thirty years if perhaps no longer includes pushing innovation or not. Just redistribution is. It hasn't Blair Elementary. Which is if we all moving into this. Brave new world of the win is going to be the people who are technologically most nimble. Let's do it out of the North Midland. But it's also obviously. I'm a question in relation to the British Labour markets as well by ending freedom of movement in relation to the citizens and controlling. Who can come in an economic sense to work in the British economy? But it's how to do this at the same time as reconfiguring Britain's economic position in the world and DC's coming to you know obvious tension with each other so if you say well what is it that the government wants it would like judging from the species at least that that it makes it would like eleven upper gender home to use its terms and it wants a global free trade agenda abroad and the way in which I work in the long term at least is is that Bush is going to be have a more adaptable economy and is going to be able to offer some leadership on the trade questions..

Coming up next