Tony Blair's third way

Résumé du document

When Tony Blair decided, in 1997, to challenge the electoral power of four consecutive Conservative governments, he pertinently chose to call his draft for Labor's electoral platform New Labor, New Life for Britain. Indeed, Labor or shall we say New Labor manifesto flaunted an unprecedented motto: "New Labor is a party of ideas and ideals but not of outdated ideology. What counts is what works. The objectives are radical. The means will be modern." Indeed, the phrase "New Labor", wittily created as a rhetorical device and intended to incorporate a wider re-branding of the party in the eyes of the electorate, embraces two essential canons: solidarity on the one hand, marriage of democracy and capitalism on the other hand. Consequently, if we had to define it, Blair's approach retains the fundamental values of the Labor party, while changing the means appropriate to their realization, and consists of trying to combine two apparently antithetic tenets: the liberal commitment to individual freedom in the market economy, and the social democratic commitment to social justice through the action of government.

Extraits

[...] “Reformers versus wreckers. That is the battle for this Parliament and it is one that we must win. Just as we must take on and defeat the big C Conservatives who want to undermine public services, so we must defeat in argument the small c conservatives who believe the old ways will do and who resist reform.” According to the Prime Minister, the Tories want to persuade people that the extra money needed to rebuild the NHS is being squandered, as well as they want to provide incentives for private health and private education –incentives that will benefit the few at the expense of the many. [...]

[...] Moreover, it takes globalization as a given and thereby fails to contest inequalities of income, wealth and power. More generally, for critics, the Third Way is contradictory. In a day-to-day government, choices have to be made, and potential contradictions and controversies may then arise. Measures are needed to restore equity and justice as a balance against the overriding drive for economic efficiency. Politically speaking, Blair's New Labour no longer represents a Socialist project, but does not hesitate to use Thatcherite methods even where its agenda promotes equity, welfare and social entitlements. [...]

[...] We shall let Mr Blair have the latest word: “Don't let anyone say nothing has changed as a result of a change of government, for if we are to defeat the wreckers, it will be from where we won the 1997 election as the party of the centre.” Bibliography Atkinson, Rob and Savage, Stephen P. “Introduction : New Labour and ‘Blairism'”. In Savage, Stephen P.; Atkinson, Rob Public policy under Blair (London: Palgrave, 2001), 1-15. Leruez, Jacques. “French views on Thatcherism and Blairism”. Historical Research, 73:182 (2000), 296-311. Publisher: Blackwell. [...]

[...] As far as the reform and investment of public services are concerned, Mr Blair has kept most of his promises: spending on the NHS has exponentially increased to 69 billion pounds in 2005- more nurses and doctors have been appointed, the Welfare State has been modernized and education improved. On the whole, it seems that Tony Blair's aims have been attained: in his 2005 manifesto, he boasts about all the achievements made possible thanks to New Labour, and proposes new ones to go a step further. However, it would be erroneous to say that the results of Blair's speech are only positive ones. [...]

[...] After a careful reading of MR Blair's quote, one cannot but notice that the text is riddled with New Labour ideals. Actually, we encounter the term on line being inextricably linked with the so-called “objectives” of the government. In this respect, the excerpt is perfectly in keeping with the party's deep aspirations and goes along with its manifestos for the 1997 and 2001 general election. Three values –equality, responsibility, and community- can be taken as the basic normative framework of Third Way politics. [...]