Tim writes that if we accept that joined up policy is not new, "we conclude
that JUP ... is indeed simply rhetoric to be condemned..." This doesn't
follow. Filing cabinets, forms and photocopiers aren't new to
administrators either, but that doesn't mean they're not useful; they're
just unexceptional. The reason for scepticism about claims to newness is
not to reflect on the government's stance, but to direct our attention to
the lessons of previous policy. The social policy community knows quite a
lot about inter-agency working - and many of us have been doing it, on and
off, for over twenty-five years. Given the resurgence of interest, it's
time to reflect on that knowledge.
The second part of Tim's complaint is that criticism "would mean the failure
of the third way ... it would leave us only with the previous alternatives
of left and right." It's unlikely that the loss of the 'Third Way' would
plunge us back into two-dimensional politics, because we never had only two
dimensions. There is a rich variety in the traditions of left and right in
the UK, far removed from either "old Labour" or "Thatcherism"; currently
important strands in the two main parties include, for example, Old Whigs,
Burkean pragmatists, Neo-Liberals, Guild socialists, Owenists, Marxists and
Greens. Try Beer, "Modern British Politics", for an analysis of schools of
thought within the Conservative party, or Crosland, "The Future of
Socialism", for an outline of traditions within the Labour Party. Between
these two books, there are already more than twenty alternative philosophies
and approaches to choose from. There have been many other centrist
proposals and political formations (including, most obviously, Macmillan's
"middle way", the Liberal Party or the Social Democratic Party). There are
more options again in the wide-ranging ideologies of other European
countries: the balancing of social responsibility and market economics, for
example, is a standard theme in Christian Democratic thought. The 'Third
Way' is a form of political shorthand. There were always far more than three
choices, but admittedly "The Twenty-Seventh Way", or something like that,
wouldn't have had the same punch. The phrase is already showing its age,
and the government has been using it less and less.
It's more important in this context to look at the substance of what the
government stands for than its style. The Third Way was a slogan, and it
did not depend on joined up policy. Equally, the idea of joined up policy
preceded the Third Way, and does not depend on it.
Paul Spicker
University of Dundee
Dundee DD1 4HN
Scotland
Tel: + 44 1382 344929
Fax: + 44 1382 344675
Website: http://www.dundee.ac.uk/politics/socialpolicy
|