Era of New Labour: The Labour Governments (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
Domestic policies
Overview of New Labour's domestic agenda
In 1997, Blair predicted he would lead 'one of the great, radical, reforming governments in our history'. After ten years in power, whether this ambition was realised remained contested. Blair's first term proved disappointing, particularly to himself and others expecting bold transformation.
Sofa government emerged as a defining characteristic of Blair's administration. This term described ad hoc meetings where important decisions were made informally, without properly minuted discussions or adequate paperwork. Lord Butler's report on intelligence in the Iraq War pointed to this practice as problematic, though it extended beyond foreign policy to encompass domestic decision-making as well.
Blair's caution in the first term stemmed from several critical factors:
- New Labour's 1997 manifesto avoided detailed policy commitments, scarred by memories of the 1992 defeat
- The party lacked a comprehensive domestic policy agenda after years in opposition
- Blair's priority centred on winning a historic second term, which required establishing a reputation for governmental competence
- This strategic calculation meant retaining existing Conservative expenditure plans during the government's first two years, severely limiting scope for genuine radicalism
The second term, following the landslide victory in 2001, witnessed greatly increased expenditure on public services. However, critics argued that Blair failed to provide sufficient long-term strategic thinking for his policy objectives. Too many around him focused on immediate media approval rather than substantive policy planning. This perception that New Labour prioritised 'spin' and presentation over genuine substance, whilst unfair in some respects, eroded the government's popular support base.
External factors further complicated Blair's domestic agenda. The 9/11 crisis and subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq diverted his attention and priorities from domestic reform. Brown's ambitions for the premiership increasingly obstructed cooperation in dealing with the incumbent. Additionally, Blair's reforms ran against the grain of traditional Labour values and objectives.
Overall, contrary to normal expectations where governments lose momentum over time, Blair proved most successful in delivering his domestic agenda during his final years in office, despite growing parliamentary party disgruntlement.
Education
Blair announced in 1995 that his first government's priorities would be 'education, education, education'. This commitment remained insistent throughout his premiership, though it did not necessarily herald major directional change. Under Andrew Adonis's influence, Blair accepted the main policies of the outgoing Conservative government.
National curriculum testing and regular school inspections continued, with Blair adding 'targets' to ensure improvements in school standards were measurable. These policies encountered greater resistance from his own backbenchers than from Conservative opposition. New Labour's greatest educational change from Labour's past was its celebration of different types of school to maximise parental choice. The belief that standards mattered more than structures seemed reasonable enough, but traditionalists opposed implementing a universal comprehensive system as an end in itself. Alastair Campbell's assertion that the days of the 'bog-standard' comprehensive were over signalled the change.
Funding and expenditure
New Labour viewed good schooling as essential to its broader social inclusion goals. At the end of the two-year spending freeze, Chancellor Brown provided substantial extra funding. Current expenditure on schools rose from £21.43 billion in 1997-98 to £34.36 billion in 2005-06. Funding for school building more than doubled over the same period.
Changes to teachers' remuneration, designed to introduce performance-related pay, created a longer, more generous salary scale. This additional expenditure appeared to improve performance. Statistics showed consistently higher pupil attainment in both primary and secondary schools. Yet scepticism persisted. Critics questioned whether pupils were genuinely better prepared year by year for tests, or whether A-level candidates were actually becoming cleverer annually as ever-improving figures suggested.
Growing Concerns About Educational Standards
Despite massive funding increases, serious doubts emerged about genuine educational improvement:
- Employers and universities expressed dissatisfaction with school-leavers' educational attainments
- Increasing numbers of parents struggled with the financial burdens of private education at a time when the state system supposedly showed marked improvement
- Educational experts worried that schools were becoming 'exam factories', where positions in league tables had become the sole measure of their existence
Higher education reforms
Higher education took a back seat to schools during the Blair years, despite having suffered severe funding cuts under the Conservatives. Education Secretary David Blunkett drew selectively upon the recent Dearing Report to impose upfront yearly fees on university students. The government announced an ambitious, if arbitrary, target participation rate of 50% of the population attending university by age 30.
This raised questions about where necessary funding would come from, especially when the government entered the 2001 election committed not to introduce 'top-up' fees. Amid criticism that many graduates emerged with degrees of questionable value, New Labour stressed that university expansion must serve the needs of the national economy.
In his second term, Blair recognised that 'top-up' fees would be necessary for British higher education to remain competitive in a global market, though Brown suggested publicly that higher fees would deter potential students from poorer backgrounds. A late change of heart by the Chancellor helped the government win the crucial Commons division in 2004 with a majority of just five votes.
The new scheme allowed for deferred, rather than upfront, payment, with bursaries for those from low-income families. Even so, university income remained substantially lower than deemed necessary by the Dearing Report. Growth in income from overseas students provided one compensating factor.
Health
One of New Labour's striking slogans during the 1997 election was that there were just '24 hours to save the NHS'. Given the almost universal affection in which the NHS was held by the British people, this proved a compelling message, albeit essentially hyperbolic electoral rhetoric.
Initial caution and planning
Given the 1997-99 spending restrictions, Blair's first term witnessed few dramatic changes. Policy until 1999 was largely left to Frank Dobson, the 'Old Labour' Secretary of State for Health. A feeling existed in Blair's circle that NHS reform was too big an issue and should be left until the second term.
However, in January 2000, apparently without consulting Brown, Blair used a television interview to announce that health spending would be increased to the average level of the EU. The NHS Plan was well received and figured prominently in the government's 2001 election strategy.
Second term reforms and challenges
Blair determined that his second term would be the time for delivery. In his reshaped government, trusted and competent ministers were placed at the head of relevant departments and given assurance of remaining in post for the duration. Alan Milburn at Health was one such minister tasked with driving through reform, though in the event, no one managed to stay the course. Blair appeared to have forgotten Harold Macmillan's adage that the biggest impediment facing governments in implementing programmes was, quite simply, 'events'.
The Scale of Health Spending Increases
The increase in health spending was spectacular on the surface. Expenditure in cash terms tripled from £30 billion in 1997 to £90 billion in 2007. Despite this, though extra money was certainly needed and produced visible improvements, few saw these as commensurate with the money poured in.
Milburn wanted to free hospitals from central control, devolving power to them as foundation hospitals, while encouraging provision from the private sector. Patient choice would be paramount, with money following the patient. Blair reminded Labour traditionalists that a system created in the late 1940s was probably not appropriate for the 21st century. Increasingly he promoted the notion of 'competition' in the health service, which was anathema to many colleagues because of the simplistic equation with 'privatisation'.
The Struggle for NHS Reform
For the Prime Minister, it was inevitably an uphill struggle. As early as 1999, he had spoken of the 'scars on his back' resulting from his efforts to reform the public services. Life was no easier in the second term:
- Brown seemed unconvinced by the direction of policy
- At the 2002 party conference, Blair claimed that 'we're at our best when at our boldest'
- Brown's 2003 conference speech carefully stated 'We are best when we are Labour' – the omission of the word 'New' was not accidental
Overall assessment
Blair bequeathed unfinished business regarding the NHS. International comparisons could be misleading but the effects of increased funding were not always easily measured. Improvements in heart disease and cancer survival rates were part of an international trend going back to the early 1990s. Britain's successful breast cancer screening programme started in the 1980s. Almost certainly, the new money would have had more effect if reforms had been fully implemented before it was injected.
Appropriate changes in working practice could have had dramatic, yet inexpensive, results. Accident and Emergency Unit waiting times were reduced by treating patients with minor injuries quickly, instead of making them wait until patients with more serious injuries had been dealt with. Some serious health issues, such as obesity and the consequent explosion of diabetes, remained to be tackled.
If most electors believed that the NHS was stronger after the Blair decade, there was no room for complacency. Problems including an ageing population, inflation in medicine and equipment costs, and huge extensions in the range of treatments potentially available, lay outside any government's control. Others, including the future cost to the NHS of the Private Finance Initiative hospital building programme, were essentially New Labour's own creation.
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) represented a way of creating a 'public-private partnership' by funding public infrastructure projects through private capital. Likely to involve high long-term repayment costs, PFI became controversial for potentially mortgaging the NHS's future financial health.
Law and order
Blair made an early impression as Shadow Home Secretary with his sound bite, 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'. He aimed to dispel Labour's image as a party that failed to match the Conservatives in their readiness to punish those who broke the law. The experience of his working-class Sedgefield constituency convinced him that the poor suffered most from crime and that law and order ranked high among the electorate's priorities.
Legislative activity
New Labour was certainly active in the field of law and order, with greater emphasis on the first half of Blair's leadership. More than 40 acts of parliament dealing with criminal justice and penal policy were placed on the statute book. One estimate suggests that more than 3000 new criminal offences were created.
At times New Labour seemed eager to appropriate the populist agenda of the Daily Mail. By the end of Blair's premiership, the government could boast a reduction in crime rates. However, the accuracy of such statistics was hotly debated, partly because of variations in the way crime is recorded and partly because of continuing popular perceptions of the threat of crime, irrespective of published figures. Furthermore, crime reduction is an international phenomenon, variously attributed to diverse causes such as harsher sentences and the removal of lead from petrol.
Post-9/11 developments
After 9/11, traditional law and order issues were compounded by new concerns over international terrorism. New Labour's difficult task was to strike an appropriate balance between the party's longstanding commitment to civil liberties and the need to maintain public safety.
The Civil Liberties Debate
A Commons defeat in November 2005 over the government's attempt to include, in its Terrorism Bill, provision for detention without trial for up to 90 days, suggested that Blair had not got the balance right or at least had not convinced his own party on this matter. Forty-nine Labour MPs voted against the proposal.
Meanwhile, increased immigration from the expanded EU, under its freedom of movement provision, and the failure of the Home Office to get a grip on asylum applications, led to further unease. The Blairite Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, had to resign in April 2006 over his department's apparent inability to deport convicted foreign criminals.
Key Points to Remember:
- Blair's first term was cautious, retaining Conservative spending plans for two years to establish governmental competence, disappointing those expecting radical reform
- Education expenditure rose dramatically from £21.43 billion (1997-98) to £34.36 billion (2005-06), though debates persisted about whether standards genuinely improved or schools became 'exam factories'
- Health spending tripled from £30 billion (1997) to £90 billion (2007), but Blair's foundation hospital reforms faced resistance from Labour traditionalists who opposed introducing 'competition' into the NHS
- Over 40 acts dealing with criminal justice created more than 3000 new criminal offences, though post-9/11 terrorism concerns led to controversial civil liberties debates, including the failed 90-day detention proposal