Mark Stuart: If they want to have the last laugh, Labour must face economic reality

But there's more to the current Labour glee than their collective

strength suggests. Traditionally, Labour has always relished the ideological purity that goes with being in Opposition. The tough

choices that go with being in Government can be fairly easily cast

aside in favour of defending deeply-held principles.

Oh yes, the Labour movement has always loved its principles. The tendency to oppose everything almost for the sake of it comes naturally to Labour, and besides, it's part of our gladiatorial parliamentary system: the job of Her Majesty's Opposition is to oppose. It also comes naturally to Labour's close allies in the unions, who will no doubt create havoc in the months to come.

Hardly surprising then to see Labour succumb to the temptation to oppose almost every aspect of the extensive public sector cuts and tax rises announced in George Osborne's first Budget. Labour leadership contender Ed Balls scored cheap points against the rise in VAT, while acting leader Harriet Harman even had the nerve to accuse the Government of "evading" its responsibilities. Such an approach is wrong on so many levels.

For a start, Labour must accept its fair share of the blame for the current financial mess. Labour are lucky because, in Alistair Darling, they have a semi-credible spokesman on the economy. The financial mess he attempted to clear up wasn't of his own making, and at least as Chancellor, he came up with a four-year plan to halve the deficit. But what happens when he steps down in the autumn, and the Shadow Cabinet elections are held? Who is going to assume his mantle? The overly aggressive Ed Balls, who even thinks that Darling's plans for cutting the deficit were too harsh? Or Ed Miliband, who seems to be arguing for an increase in the welfare budget for the middle classes at a time of exploding welfare bills? Surely not.

What all the trade union leaders and almost all the Labour leadership contenders, with the exception of David Miliband, fail to realise is that mature oppositions have to do more than merely oppose for the

sake of it.

During the 1997 Parliament, when Tory leader William Hague accepted a string of New Labour measures, including devolution, the national minimum wage and independence for the Bank of England, he was merely recognising reality.

As research conducted by myself and Philip Cowley at the University of Nottingham has shown, during the course of the first Blair term, Hague sensibly accepted six out of every 10 Labour measures.

Under David Cameron's leadership, consensus not conflict became his watchword, as he went along with nearly 80 per cent of Labour's measures. Although it is not popular with one's own supporters,

agreeing with the government of the day is a first and vital step in proving that an opposition is again ready to become a responsible government-in-waiting.

So, is it not incumbent upon the current crop of Labour leadership contenders to recognise that a large number of measures in the Budget are both sensible and necessary? For instance, shouldn't the new Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which has at last produced realistic growth projections, become part of the furniture of the country's financial management?

Isn't it incumbent upon Labour to set out how it would cut the

country's burgeoning welfare bill? How might the party face up to the need to lift the cap on tuition fees, given that Britain's top

universities must be able to compete internationally?

Instead, Labour and its friends in the unions seem to be in a state of denial about the harsh economic environment in which all politicians, whether in or out of government, must now operate.

Moreover, the political reality is that, after the early hiccup over the David Laws resignation, this coalition Government has hit the ground running by signalling its absolute determination to tackle the deficit quickly.

Such has been the brisk pace set by key Ministers that Labour risks being left behind in a largely irrelevant leadership contest that won't be resolved until the autumn, by which time the cuts in public finances will already have been agreed in the Treasury.

During the General Election, Gordon Brown famously told Nick Clegg in the second leaders' debate to "get real".

The truth is that it is Labour that needs to get real on the state of the nation's finances.

If it merely goes on defending its core supporters in the public

sector, then it will never be able to appeal to those voters who

rejected it so decisively on May 6. And if that happens, then a prolonged spell in Opposition will soon wipe the smiles off the faces of Labour MPs.