British Expatriate Network

How do you think Tony Blair will be remembered in future? Do you think he'll be more recognised as the man who changed a failed Labour Party or more as a crawly bum-lick to a weirdo American President?

I think he's most likely to be remembered (mostly in comparison to those before him) to have been not too shabby by half. British voters tend to loathe his predeccesors (at least those who I talk to do) so he should measure up ok there. He's done pretty well for his party, ok with regards British policies, and only time will tell how foreign policy will be judged, but at this early stage it is viewed as a shambles to be honest. I did read this in TCS and thought it articulated what he has done (in "I Am a Man of My Time")-:

http://www.techcentralstation.com/

"Enoch Powell, a controversial British conservative, famously remarked that all political careers end in failure. Blair's career had been a success by most accounts: After transforming a fossilized Labor Party that people associated with the ``Winter of Discontent'' -- a time of economic and social disaster in the 1970s -- into a formidable political machine, he went on to obtain three consecutive victories. He got rid of the sleaze that had dominated the last Conservative government under John Major but preserved much of Margaret Thatcher's legacy. The economy did well, experiencing the highest rate of per capita growth among the G-7 nations in the last decade. The opposition Tories seemed lost forever. People even spoke of the Liberal Democrats becoming the second party in British politics.

But three things got in Blair's way. He decided to become almost a Cabinet secretary in President Bush's government rather than a partner in the tradition of the Anglo-American ``special relationship.'' He also decided that the reform of the welfare state consisted of pouring money into the bottomless pit. And, finally, he failed to transform the culture of the party he had so ably led out of the wilderness in 1997....Becoming so cozy with Bush meant that he would pay the price of failure if U.S. foreign policy failed, and gain none of the credit if it succeeded."


I think that's pretty bang on really. The TCS article does go on about the dreaded socialist state(typically I must admit) but it seems fair to me. I was very very optimistic about the New LAbour government in the late 90s and now I'm back there really isn't anyone else. Blair's legacy, to me, rests on whether anyone has the balls to really reform national services and actually suceeds. His foreign policy aims will probably be swallowed up by a new succession of PMs and cabinets who do exactly the same as he did.

Don't know whether he'll be remembered for it, but I think his legacy includes fundamental constitutional changes and modernization of several institutions.

Devolution, Human Rights, the Supreme Court.
However, I alaways got the impression that he was not entirely on board with these, hence the half hearted and unfinished 'reforms' to the house of lords and Northern Ireland.
My fear is that the Tories opposed much of these and will try and roll back what they can and undermine the rest.
Thus progress will be stymied for another generation.

In summary, my perceptions is of a legacy of missed opportunities.

There has been a history of labour making "Great Leaps Forward" and then the tories have made them more practical, and that has sometimes involved partial rollbacks.

I'm cynical enough to think that the "Reform of the Lords" was so they could sell more seats to their financial benefactors.

I suspect that he had an interest in these things, but saw the chance to be a "World Statesman" above and beyond the UK's natural position in the world, and went for it.