ON THE SURFACE of things, the election of Neil Kinnock to follow Foot as Labour leader seems rather curious.
Labour has suffered its electoral defeat ever. Surely the time has come for a rethink? You would therefore expect a shift in the political complexion of the party and its leader? Yet at first sight Neil Kinnock 'status quo'; Foot's loyal lieutenant. Kinnock-Hattersley is merely a youthful replay Healey. Or is it?
Kinnock himself comes from a long line of erstwhile 'lefts' achieve the leadership of the Party on a left surge, only to impose 'moderation' and 'realism' on the basis of left credentials.
Kinnock came into Parliament as a middle-of-the-road Tribunite, supporting opposing tor good ana agamnst evu. Just lwo years ago he was making the fund raising speech at the big demonstration in Trafalgar Square, even if he did muff it by referring to "perverts' in his speech — only to be called back to apologise to 'the gay section of the audience'.
He was for a year or so mid-1970s Michael Foot's PPS, but declined junior ministries at Industry and Consumer Protection because of *fundamental disagreements' Callaghan's economic policies. 1978 he was on the NEC, and in 1979 finally 'let' Callaghan twist his arm became Shadow Secretary.
With rather disarming honesty he claims to come from 'the posthumous Bevanite left, which was always more interested in securing tories In arguments.' An axiom which nock acted on with a vengeance when he and a handful of other Tribunite MPs deprived Tony Benn Deputy leadership, by abstaining in the run-off between Benn Healey.
Neil Kinnock owes his present position as leader elect not to any brilliant personal capacities, the fact that he presents himself as the embodiment of a political contradiction rending the Labour Party - that between the left swing of the last four and the determination of the trade union bureaucracy and the PLP not to let the Bennites take over the Party. These two factors have produced the present highly unstable coumonu which cannot be ed. Kinnock will not be 'Foot Mark 2'. He is preparing for a major shift to The 'mould' of British politics was decisively broken not by the SDP, but in the mid 1970s - by the election of Thatcher as Tory leader and by the of 'Bennism' These two Wilson and After all, Dy Labowl activists generation of people in worst movement whose ments.
represents expenditure of FootLabour left.
Kinnock would not be leader.
apartheid, the first "Bennite' has turned sharply right.
Some of leaders Peter Hain visors to 're-shape' The drift of this re-shaped policy becoming very clear. with By party of the underprivileged.
Hducation and taxation.
ViC'internal Kin"affluent working class, of the successful.
but to council house sales mon Market • the explicit maintainKnock not to square behind the witch socialists in the Labour Party.
But the Socialist Action 7. October 1983 represented the verdict on the Heath government by the Tories, and the Callaghan governments Today there is a the labour pollical outlook has been tempered by the failure of the two. post-1951 Labour govern- CULOUS Both the 1964-70 government and the 1974-79 government responded to at the growing economic crisis with wage attempts to curb the unions. Socialist measures were never given a I0OK In. This governmental failure by Labour produced the emergence of the 'hard' Without that 'hard' left Since the 1981 Deputy Leadership who campaign the Bennite left has begun to split. That process of realignment has turned into a stampede since the general election. In particular one of pressure groups, the Labour Co-ordinating Committee Kinnock's campaign — like Frank Dobson MP and — will be kept on as aaLabour policy The 'soft left' analysis of Labour's election defeat is that Labour appeared too much as the Neil Kinnock was saying months ago that: 'We have given the impression that we are simply not attuned to the re-shuffled class system since the fifties, to things like home ownership We must convince the British people that we are in favour of Basing itself on the myth of the this is just another way of saying that Labour must move right to become electorally The outlines of the shift on policy are becoming abundantly clear. They • dropping Labour's opposition to • dropping opposition to the Cam• 're-defining' Labour's strategy on nuclear weapons so that all ambiguity on Polaris is eliminated — we'll keep support of incomes policy via the device of advocating 'minimum and maximum incomes.
Statements by leaders of the Militant tendency that they 'expect' Kinhunts are bordering on the bizarre. puisuc further Kinnock indicated through his voting on last year's NEC that he is full hunt of probability of further witch hunts derives not from Kinnock's personal view but from the situation in which the Labour leadership will find itself. The attempt to move Labour rightwards will be bitterlv resisted The pressure to attempt to silence the left through witch hunts will be During the time of this parliament there will be another pressure, which moment 1s bubbling away below the surface — the pressure ol coalitionism. To even begin to get the Labour Party into a situation where such a project could be contemplated means crushing the Bennite left.
There is a maxim which has been much discussed by the party and trade union tops over recent weeks - the™ notion that the Labour Party 'is best led from left of centre. Put more frankly, this means if you want an ef fective leader to put forward right wing policies, better have someone can confuse the situation with 'left' credentials. Capture Harold Wilson did it brilliantly after 1964, utilising his Bevanite and against George Brown - a Kinnock-Hattersley run-off of yesteryear. The Kinnock Wilson is that the former is unlikely The British ruling class is today backing Thatcher for all they are worth. But the more far-sighted among them are clever enough not to put all their money on one horse. Despite all deliver the goods economically. The prepare for any faltering of Thatcher, the Labour Party and its left wing in establishment is one so gutted of left wing policies and activists that it can serve in a coalition with the likes of David Owen. In the long run there is only one road to success in Labour's battle with the Alliance — that of having clear and radical alternatives to the Alliance's pro-capitalist policies. Hain and the LCC right wing are bas- ine mood of the moment rather than an analysis of what is going to happen in the future. The crisis of the British economy is going to deepen. Every political party is going to be thrown into turmoil. Moderate policies are going to be nowhere near a credible answer to the coming crisis. Neither is Neil Kinnock.
There are plenty of people who are voting for Kinnock today who will bitterly regret it in two or three years time. The hard left' could be involved in a life or death struggle with Kinnock long before then.