DECEIT AND SHAM; the Corruption of Government Systemic Lying Awesome Waste and Debt Armed Forces Betrayed Falling Health and Education Standards Rampant Welfare Dependency and an Intrusive Nanny State; CORRELLI BARNETT'S Devastating Assessment of What History's Verdict Will Be on 13 Years of New Labour

Daily Mail (London), May 6, 2010 | Go to article overview

DECEIT AND SHAM; the Corruption of Government Systemic Lying Awesome Waste and Debt Armed Forces Betrayed Falling Health and Education Standards Rampant Welfare Dependency and an Intrusive Nanny State; CORRELLI BARNETT'S Devastating Assessment of What History's Verdict Will Be on 13 Years of New Labour


Byline: CORRELLI BARNETT

LET THERE be no mistake. Today's vote will be a referendum on New Labour's 13-year record in government. New Labour -- especially the Blairite wing -- constantly brags about winning three successive general elections, as if simply gaining and holding on to office was the main purpose of politics.

But how will history judge the Blair and Brown Years?

First and foremost, it will pronounce that New Labour was not just another administration of the traditional British kind -- but instead a regime.

For they came to power in 1997 with a mission to build an ever-more powerful state, whose interfering apparatchiks would stop individual citizens from having responsibility for their own lives.

They would also introduce endless bureaucratic diktats, or 'guidelines' -- with bossy instructions for everything, such as even telling families what they ought to eat.

History will note that the regime's totalitarian purpose was brilliantly served by Blair's close crony and director of communications -- a master of propaganda and media manipulation called Alastair Campbell.

Yet, eventually, a surfeit of staged photos, rigged interviews and re-heated policy announcements led to a deep distrust of what became known as spin.

The public came to know the truth about New Labour: Whitehall's mismanagement of the NHS and of state education, the ballooning of the national debt, the uncontrolled borders that led to record levels of immigration and the insidious encroachments of the Nanny State.

The contrast between the spin and gloss and the self-evident truth of what was really happening to this country shook the public's faith in their political system, breeding cynicism and apathy.

History will therefore pronounce that the New Labour regime was culpable of institutionalised falsity.

This was manifested on the regime's very first day in power in May 1997. In a PR stunt masterminded by Campbell for the benefit of the TV cameras, Tony Blair entered Downing Street amid the adulation of countless well-wishers -- who were, in fact, a mob of bussed-in New Labour 'groupies'. The new Prime Minister then delivered a few inspiring 'catch-inthe-throat' words from the steps of No 10.

And what, indeed, could have been more symbolic of New Labour's falsity than the charismatic Fuhrer of the new regime himself, actor Blair -- then as pretty as a pop star and almost as youthful?

Nevertheless, tragically, it would take years before the nation saw through the sham and the shallowness.

Yes, shallowness. For history will find that New Labour's idea of a well-devised policy was one which led to headlines on that night's TV news and the next day's news-papers' front pages.

For example, recorded in history's footnotes will be such headline-grabbers as Blair's brilliant wheeze that litterbugs would be marched off to the nearest cash-point to withdraw money in order to pay a fine.

But, typically, this idea lasted no longer than it takes a cigarette butt to fall from a lout's fingertips to the pavement.

The truth is, however, that history will arraign the New Labour regime on much more serious charges than mere shallow opportunism.

It will find them guilty of adopting a novel kind of moral code, in which what was judged as moral was simply that which best served the interests of the Party and the regime.

Under New Labour, from No10 downwards, it was no sin to dissemble or unscrupulously manipulate statistics -- or even to tell flat-out lies.

For these people, the sin lay in being found out.

Only last month, Gordon Brown had to apologise to the Commons for falsely claiming to the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war that, when he was Chancellor, defence expenditure had increased every year.

In fact, as he had to admit after being found out, it had actually dropped in four of those years. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

DECEIT AND SHAM; the Corruption of Government Systemic Lying Awesome Waste and Debt Armed Forces Betrayed Falling Health and Education Standards Rampant Welfare Dependency and an Intrusive Nanny State; CORRELLI BARNETT'S Devastating Assessment of What History's Verdict Will Be on 13 Years of New Labour
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.