Stephen Twigg is chair of Progress and director of Foreign Policy Centre. In an interview during this year’s Labour party conference in Brighton, Twigg spoke to the Italian political journal Critica Sociale about the possibility of a Labour fourth term in office, and his concerns over recent developments in the European centre-left.
What is the state of political divisions in the Labour party as it approaches the general election?
‘In a contribution which appeared in the Guardian newspaper in the early days of the conference, I urged my colleagues to stop the destructive conflicts between ‘Brownites’ and ‘Blairites’. In fact, Blair and Mandelson have made Labour history. Anyway, I appreciate the existence of an internal debate within the party on our achievements in the past and our commitments in the future. Some believe there is much to correct, but I am convinced that the path outlined in 1997 has produced great results for our country. However, today I perceive a more peaceful feeling, a mutual respect and a convinced collaboration in Labour ranks. We are lessening the divisions of the past. The majority of our supporters appreciate what Blair did, expecting the government to defend his heritage and fight back in order to convince voters to give it the fourth consecutive term. Finally, I remember how the same Gordon Brown was among the architects of the first hour of 1997 and therefore the proper person to continue the job.’
What do you think of the prolonged crisis of European, and Italian, centre-left?
‘By leveraging the experience of my parents in the ranks of the British Communist party in the1970s, I have known several members of the PCI/PDS first and the Democratic party then, deepening my knowledge of the dynamics of Italian politics, even locally. The Italian left lacks a strong link and needs to adjust to the realities of the rest of progressive Europe. The problem is also due to the weak networks between socialist, social democrats and reformist parties. In fact, the European left suffers in a state of prostration also because of provincialism in the various national experiences. It seems necessary for a greater commitment to dialogue and mutual interchange, from Britain to Germany, from France to Italy and Spain. It would be a great opportunity for cultural enrichment, which certainly would help Italians reformers to stand up and present itself as a credible government alternative. Another aspect to improve is about internal democracy and dialogue between the different wings. Often the majority tends to silence internal opposition in the name of the union. It is a question that regards New Labour too, and on which I will continue to insist. Without a genuine internal debate the party risks becoming stale and out of touch. I hope that the leaders of my party do not forget it.’
During the conference you chaired a meeting focused on climate change and the United Nations summit that will take place in Copenhagen next December to set common international rules. Do you think there will be a realistic compromise between developed and developing states?
‘I hope in a special effort of responsibility by Europe and the United States. The fact is that positions remain very distant and difficult to bring together before the UN summit in Denmark. Even the evocative appeals of Barack Obama to the general assembly of the United Nations, recently convened in New York, have to collide with the persistent reality of national interests and egoisms. We should have patience, hoping that the forthcoming UN conference on climate change will be a first step towards a better understanding of the common challenges we face as an international community. Our shared responsibility is to avoid tragic scenarios in the near future. It is rather utopist to expect too much from Copenhagen, but it should be a genuine beginning for a global environmental commitment.’
A version of this interview was originally published in the October 2009 edition of Critica Sociale.