The Blair Years in Alastair Campbell’s Own Words

Recently, I had the opportunity to interview Tony Blair’s former Spin Doctor Alastair Campbell and question him on his Labour Government. My purpose when going into this interview was to gain insider access to the successes and failures of the Blair Administration. I believe I was successful in my aim, gaining insight into Blair’s infamous ‘sofa government’, the Government’s policy on crime, and leadership struggles which severely impacted Blair’s ability to govern.

Prior to the interview, I conducted a research project into Blair’s leadership style. First coined by the Editor of the Times Newspaper Daniel Finkelstein, the term ‘sofa government’, highlighted the style of government in which he argued Blair was a proprietor, seeking to make decisions amongst a smaller group of technocratic specialists, rather than using a traditional cabinet government in which all cabinet members were involved in the policy process. It became clear to me that this style was necessary due to the modernisation of politics as it was no longer practical to lead a cabinet government. This was down to several reasons, most notably, it had become the case that by the early 1990’s media influence had become so great that the governmental structure had to modernise; Blair’s predecessor John Major had already adapted to it before Blair suggesting that Blairs’ style wasn’t that major a change. During the interview, I asked Campbell for his views on this idea: he was adamant that the influence of Blair’s ‘sofa government’ had been overstated, arguing that policy making was a wholly collective issue as policy ideas must go through civil servants, experts, and advisers before they even reach cabinet.

This wasn’t an issue I had considered before ; decision making goes through so many stages and checks that the final decision is normally always collective.

Another topic of conversation was New Labour’s idea of being, ‘tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’. This approach was also used by President Bill Clinton in the US. I took issue to this approach as it doesn’t attempt to attack the true cause of crime, poverty. This approach had a disproportionate effect on ethnic minorities in the UK. On the issue of knife crime in London this approach only worsened tensions between the impoverished and the police and does little to combat the huge rise of knife related violence in recent years. I questioned Campbell on the direction of this policy and the Government’s lack of prioritisation of knife crime. He made it clear that he firmly believed in this way of dealing with crime and that he believed other issues to be more in national interest.

I concluded that the lack of action on the subject of knife crime from all parts of the political spectrum is due to a lack of empathy within privileged political parties and organisations. I believe this is a real and prevalent issue; no government has shown any intent on attacking the root causes of this problem and this also applies to the Blair administration.

A key talking point of the Blair administration was his tumultuous relationship with his Chancellor and successor, Gordon Brown. After their successful election campaign in 1997, it was clear that there was a divide in government between the aptly named, Blairites and Brownites; it was a coalition of power, Blair had to appease Brown supporters at every turn to avoid threat of rebellion. By 2001, Brown was already demanding a departure date for Blair, during our conversation, Alastair Campbell recalled Brown saying to Blair, “You betrayed me. You said you would never challenge me, and you took that away from me.” Blair had agreed to give Brown power after 3 terms and in 2005 this became a realisation. It could be argued Brown limited Blair’s vision for the country with his agenda. I put this theory to Alastair Campbell. Campbell was sure to distance himself from this judgement, he argued that New Labour wouldn’t have worked without Brown, he saved Blair from the Euro, he delivered sweeping reforms taking millions out of poverty whilst increasing educational standards. It must be said that this is a strong argument, and Brown’s political might was assured after the 2008 global financial crisis in which he led a sound response alongside the US and dozens of other countries.

This experience gave me a true insight into the Blair Administration. It is easy to disregard Gordon Brown as a disruptive and incompetent politician, who was untrustworthy with the economy, but he was essential to the fabric of the Blair Administration, he kept the party together for those ten years. Although I disagree with their policy on crime, the Labour Party had good intentions and Blair’s style of government has clearly been exaggerated in recent time to attack unpopular decisions his government made.