There are two theories about the fate of the many Tory voters who used to roam freely across the plains of Scotland.
The most common theory also happens to be the least persuasive: that during the last Major government, they had a Damascene conversion and chose to turn their backs on the evils of unbridled capitalism, embracing instead the virtues of social democracy, or even full-throated socialism.
The second theory, unfortunately, happens to be far closer to reality: they did indeed lose faith in Major’s party, partly because they lost faith in its message, but also in its ability to actually win. They switched their allegiance, initially directly to Tony Blair’s Labour party and then, more recently, to Salmond’s nationalists (although widely different voting patterns at Westminster and Holyrood elections make the picture far more complex). In other words, they’re still Tories; they just don’t bother voting Tory any more.
It is perfectly true, as Owen Jones recently pointed out in his recent Independent column, that in 1955 the Tories became the only party ever in Scotland to win more than 50 per cent of the popular vote. What Jones failed to point out is that the biggest electoral mandate given to any party in more recent times was that given to Tony Blair’s Labour party in 1997. In that momentous election, we made a deliberate pitch for – and won – the support of Tory voters with a manifesto that was radical and progressive, but which, crucially, accepted many of the economic facts of life which previous Labour manifestos had chosen to deny.
Jones used his article to repeat the message he and his comrades on the far-left preach at every opportunity, whatever the subject: only by turning sharp left can Labour attract enough support to win future elections. By refusing to embrace the kind of policies that would make members of the Socialist Workers’ party sleep soundly in their beds, wrote John McDonnell’s former parliamentary researcher, Scottish Labour …
‘has apparently willingly sacrificed its role as Scotland’s standard-bearer of social justice to the SNP, ensuring that progressive politics and the cause of independence have become welded together.’
Consider that accusation for just a moment: support for independence has, through our failings, been ‘welded together’ with social justice. And yet, support for Scottish independence in all the latest polls has struggled to get above 30 per cent – reflecting the rough level of support it was when Alex Salmond first became Scottish National party leader in 1990. It is a decidedly minority interest. Does this mean that Jones thinks that social justice in Scotland, being ‘welded’ with support for independence, engages barely three in 10 Scots? That doesn’t say much for a nation which, Jones apparently believes, has a political centre of gravity which is significantly to the left of the rest of the UK.
What seems to offend Jones the most is the recent speech by Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont in which she pointed out the fact that Scotland could not become ‘the only something-for-nothing country in the world.’ He was particularly irked by her open-minded approach to the funding of higher education in Scotland, where university students still get their degrees for free. This has led directly to a massive funding gap between universities north and south of the border and a consequent lack of expansion in the number of university places here (and this led Scottish education minister Mike Russell last autumn to celebrate the fact that every university place for the new academic year in Scotland had already been filled. Celebrate? He should have been ashamed!).
If you come from a deprived or even working-class background in Scotland, you have less chance of getting to university than any of your compatriots living in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. That inexcusable situation is one with which the ‘leftwing’ SNP are perfectly contented, and one which the ‘sell out’ Scottish Labour party are determined to address.
The answer, Jones inevitably claims, is to devolve tax-raising powers and increase the amount that workers already contribute to higher education. In other words, if you’re a shelf-stacker earning minimum wage at Tesco’s, be prepared to surrender even more of your pay packet so that students – many of whom come from a wealthy backgrounds – can get a free degree and earn much more than you.
Fortunately for Lamont and Scottish Labour – and for the generations of working-class kids who might aspire to university education in the future – Scots are more supportive of the principle of charging students than Jones is.
The idea that Labour lost so badly in 2011 because we weren’t leftwing enough is risible and, incidentally, completely unsupported by any kind of evidence. Jones is right to denigrate the ridiculous flagship policy with which we went into that election, promising to lock up anyone carrying a knife in public. The policy has its merits, but it was hardly going to inspire voters to come out and vote for us. But neither did the SNP win because it claims to be (though is clearly not) leftwing; they won because it was seen to be positive, competent, energetic and enthusiastic about its cause. Scots, who don’t, on the whole, support their ultimate aim of separation, nevertheless voted for them because they had confidence in their ability to run those services which have been devolved to Holyrood. Scottish Labour, in contrast, looked enfeebled, unsure of what we stand for, lacking in confidence and in need of an array of persuasive policies.
But before Jones considers ‘The strange death of Scottish Labour’, he might want to consider another inconvenient truth: that a mere year before May 2011, many more Scots voted Scottish Labour at the general election than voted for the the SNP administration in Edinburgh.
Jones finishes his article by repeating a nasty piece of what we used to call ‘Trot-Nat’ propaganda. Of Scottish Labour campaigners, a ‘senior Labour source’ apparently told him: ‘It’s not even contempt any more – we’re laughed at on the doorstep.’ I’m not accusing Jones of lying – he clearly believes his conveniently anonymous source. But his source was lying. Activists from my own party are out on the doorsteps of Glasgow South every Saturday morning, and the reception we regularly receive is overwhelmingly positive. Other MPs will tell you the same, and they’re not lying. Admittedly, voters are still not convinced about Scottish Labour’s claim to govern at Holyrood. But neither are they enamoured of Salmond’s ministerial team. When carrying out voter ID on the issue of independence, it’s rare to doorstep anyone who supports breaking up the UK. That quote was certainly not from any friend of Labour, and Jones’ use of it did my party, and his own argument, a disservice.
—————————————————————————————
Tom Harris is MP for Glasgow South. He tweets @TomHarrisMP
—————————————————————————————
Excellent response, well argued and demolishes many of ones.the arguments put forward by Mr J
As an activist in an inner city London Borough, as a ‘shelf stacker’ in a retail store, as a normal member of the public even; what people most say to me when I tell them to vote labour is something on the lines of “Why? What’s the difference?”. What you’ve written above is the political equivalent of an ostrich sticking it’s head in the sand. I hope you have a long neck Mr. Harris.
By next year we will have had three son’s choosing university as a route to a better salary, so if there any shelf-stacker’s out there who want to help pay for it please get in touch but as a Labour supporter I don’t think it right for us to expect you to do that. Our eldest son is now paying his graduate tax and doing fine, the second has a job offer for the autumn. So, what’s the difference? Equality of opportunity for all. I benefited from the Labour policies in the 60’s (comprehensive school + grant for university) and so now I can help support our sons through university.
Anyone that proposes left-wing dogma as a solution to the UK’s problems is just hiding from the truth, which is that if we don’t compete we are dead. Simply put: Labour will invest in people first and the capitalists second, whilst the Tory’s do the opposite. Left-wing quack medicines won’t work in the face of competition from China.
There is plenty of evidence to suggest we weren’t left-wing enough and still aren’t. Mostly being that’s what people are saying and how they are voting when they have the confidence/experience of doing so at Scottish parliament elections.
Good to see the loony left alive and well and still stoutly resisting reality.
Why would a shelf stacker on minimum wage pay more tax under a socialist government? unless we maintain the low levels of tax on higher earners and companies of course.
If the economy doesn’t succeed due to irresponsible dogmatic decisions, we all pay more tax. The reason is that those with capital, like the pension funds, will invest it in foreign lands for a better return. We have to make it worthwhile for them to invest funds here, and that requires most of us to work harder for less, thus leaving a greater share of resources for those at the bottom so that they have a chance too. That’s socialism.
Tom , completely not the point – the uncontestable truth is that Labour was triangulated from the left pushing them off centre left ground and to the right because the have to define themselves against anything they think of as the left and and coming from SNP. If we continue to think the worst of Scots; that they wont like good caring sharing policies then whats the point ? Use your political agency to create something better not react to the less good
I’ll might start to believe that Labour are not left wing enough if people started voting for parties that were avowedly to the left of Labour. So far the trend to “4th” parties (nationally) is to UKIP (now ahead of the Lib Dems), and SNP (i.e. Tartan Tories). Respect can pull off a victory i the”right kind of area” where the “pull” is anything but progressive, and the Greens appeal is by no means consistently leftist and has a strong small “c” conservatism aspect.
Talk about a failure to learn from history. The 1997 manifesto accepted “certain economic Facts”. No it, rightly, recognised the economic consensus behind neo liberal theory that had at that point been building for some time. It goes without saying that the consensus is being questioned and the need for regulation is back in vogue. Labour like in 1997 must move with the times.
First why is Tom Harris’s response so late when Owen Jones wrote his article on 23rd December? Surely it was putting your foot in your mouth for Johann Lamont to say there should be an end to free university tuition? I’ve read Owen Jones article in the Independent and it is an attack on the Scottish Labour Leadership, calling it a mess. I haven’t read any good news coming from the Labour Party in Scotland to give me any evidence that it’s not a mess!
John McCormack – Do you really think that socialism is about making sure that British workers earn not a penny more than their Chinese counterparts? Are you sure you’ve not got that confused with national socialism? When Straw Hat says working people are saying they don’t think Labour’s for them, you say that’s left wing dogma. I think it could be that Straw Hat cares about them, don’t you? I guess if you’re a national socialist you’re looking for order and control, and you’re very paranoid about not only socialism but also about democracy.
Trixie – you made some good points. They should all have decent wages, of course. What worries me is that if left-wing economic decisions disregard international competition, our people will pay for it with their jobs. I wish I were wrong.
Maybe I am confused between different forms of socialism. However, I do very much fear the “order and control” that left-wing policies led east European countries to. Plurality, diversity and democracy are key for me. What we can’t do, unless really desperate, is to invest money in temporary hole digging & filling that lead us down economic dead ends. We must compete, so government should invest in its people in ways that release their potential. We have so much talent here. Proper support for our media industries would be a start. Maybe I am unsure what left-wing means these days. What does it mean to you?
Tom, as I’m sure you’re aware, Tony Blair managed his historic victories by creating a coalition of left and centre. There were some policies which were really meaty left-wing ones – as well as more moderate and centralist ones. By appealing to such a broad spectrum, he won us 3 thumping victories.
We forgot that, in 2011. We didnt include the left wing stuff. We had nothing to appeal to those voters.
INterestingly enough – the SNP HAVE copied Tony Blair. They have enough left wing polcies to claim to be progressive, with a fair chunk of right wing ones to keep those ex-tories on board.
a member of Tory party advised that ” SNP did not win we gave up.”. The problem we have is that any Labour failings are blown up and out loud SNP failings are being covered. They have had their own “Cuts commmission ” cuts to services, closures and staff redundancies. Sadly these are not always brought together to give comprehensive picture of SNP policies in action. Last years Council elections reversed SNP bandwagon, we need to keep it rolling back.