Labouring On

The Labour Party must strike a balance between continuity and change, says ALON OR-BACH

11 years of Labour in government - almost twice the length of the 1945 Attlee government - is an unprecedented landmark that many thought would never happen. Three terms in office has given Labour the chance to embed progressive policies and shift the political landscape in Britain. But now the party faces a tough challenge - a challenge it never had the luxury of confronting before. How does a political party renew its offer to the public whilst in power? The only recent comparable event was the Tories' last term in power. But most of the lessons to be learnt are from the failures of John Major's government to renew itself, from the abysmal record of his "back to basics" initiative.

In presidential systems, term limits help parties to renew after a spell in charge. To Labourites' unease, McCain may appear to be a sufficient change from Bush to make the Democrats' fight for the White House difficult. But in parliamentary systems, it is very unlikely that anyone will rise to prominence whilst their party is in power without being linked to the party's record in office.

Hence Labour's, and Gordon Brown's, obvious dilemma. Unlike the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats who have both gone through four leaders in the past decade, Labour does not have the luxury of opposition and the ability to reinvent itself time and time again. Gordon Brown's attempts to renew both party and government have to tread the narrow line between offering a break from the past whilst not attacking Blair's - and by implication his own - record.

The difficulty with renewal in government stems from the burden of one's time in power, and the accusations of u-turns and failures when a change in policy is unveiled. So how can Labour build on past achievements whilst recognising new challenges? How should it strike the balance between continuity and change?

Take housing. The government has recognised that the job still to be done is to provide more affordable housing, allocating £8 billion to deliver three million new homes by 2020 and allowing councils to take the lead in building new social housing for rent. The Conservative response to this is to buddy-up with the NIMBY campaigners and scaremonger about building in people's back gardens - whilst skirting around the lack of supply in the housing market, particularly social housing for rent. The Lib Dems often do likewise, with their mayoral candidate in London refusing to commit to Labour's 50% affordable housing target, where it most acutely needed.

Another good example is that of the environment and climate change. The Stern Report of 2006 laid the groundwork for the current Climate Change Bill, in which it is proposed that Britain should set itself binding targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Labour's record on the environment is a good one, and far too easily forgotten now that climate change has become an issue on the doorstep, not just in pressure groups. So again, the Labour party needs to recognise what has already been achieved - in helping to establish the Kyoto protocol in 1997, substantially increasing the standard rate of landfill tax, pioneering the renewables obligation and setting out plans for a carbon reduction commitment from 2010 - but also to move forward at a faster pace, now that the public will has been established.

Labour's approach to the National Health Service is another example of a policy area where the party has sought to build on its successes in the past in response to new challenges. In its first decade in office the party focused on cutting waiting lists and injecting much needed finance into the service. Now, Gordon Brown recognises that in the NHS must offer a more personalised service if it is to meet people's expectations in the twenty-first century.

The party needs to act convincingly with a fresh approach to issues, while conveying what has been achieved. This is most acutely apparent on issues of crime. Labour has increased the number of police on the streets with an associated drop in crime levels. But when the issue of rising gun and knife crime is addressed - whether by the media or political parties - it creates false perceptions that this is indicative of crime in general, and the wider picture of falling crime is lost.

In 2005 the Liberal Democrats declared themselves the "real" opposition and pundits were estimating the date to inscribe on the Tory Party's tombstone. Sadly, memories are often too short, and the Tories have shown that conservatism isn't quite that easy to write off. Witness the party’s row over grammar schools and Lord Saachi's warning in July 2007 that "nicey nicey politics" will not win the Conservatives the next general election. Lynton Crosby, the mastermind of Michael Howard's "it’s not racist to impose limits on immigration" posters, is making a return to Conservative HQ as Cameron struggles to appease the uneasy core of his party.

Meanwhile, gone are the days of the Lib Dems manoeuvring to the left with the election of David Cameron's "stunt double", Nick Clegg. In education, for example, Clegg's plans for "free schools" are a far cry from the party's opposition to choice and competition under Charles Kennedy.  This provides Labour with new opportunities to reconnect with disaffected voters whose support the party lost at the last general election. As the Lib Dems converge on Conservative ground, the dichotomy of left and right may once again resurface in British politics. These party political changes are significant, but as a party of government the most important challenge for Labour is to embrace eleven years' achievement while not letting this predetermine future policy. It's a tough balance, but one the party must get right if it is to win again.

Alon Or-bach is a member of the Labour Party's National Policy Forum