HOW will New Labour’s “praetorian guard” react to the Jeremy Corbyn win? Much of the press give the impression that the plot starts now: the coup happens within months.

But the feeling I got from Labour conference is that the Blairites inside the party are not up to plotting, for now at least.

The insult of the 4.5 per cent result for Liz Kendall has left them reeling in different directions.

The Progress rally is one of the key New Labour shindigs at the conference. A couple of hundred Progress supporters filled a hall in an Odeon cinema next to the main hall. This was actually bigger than last year’s rally, so the Blairites are gathering in response to the Corbyn victory. But they got no clear lead from the dozens of ex-shadow cabinet ministers addressing them.

Some pushed their chin out against the wind of Corbynism. Caroline Flint stuck to her familiar themes, arguing Labour had “been in denial” for “the past five years and beyond” over the deficit and immigration. Tristram Hunt joked he was a “God-fearing, national anthem-singing, roast beef-eating member of Progress.” But after the jokes, even Tristram agonised over the “populist” surge tearing into his version of “social democracy” all over Europe.

Other members were really soul–searching and worried. Ivan Lewis, one of the MPs who nominated Liz Kendall in the leadership ballot, gave a particular flavour of the long dark night of the soul they were going through. He said “moderates and modernisers” had to face up to their mistakes.

His list included: “The spectre of Iraq. Being too starry-eyed about the private sector’s role in reforming public services... Our approach to business and the market. On the one hand coming too late to the need for an active industrial strategy.

On the other, refusing to embrace the need for serious dialogue with business about ethics as well as profits... Insufficient concern and not having serious answers to widening inequality in the UK and across the world.”

His self-criticism session for the “modernisers” went on. The “self-indulgent divide between ‘Blairites’ and ‘Brownites’... has got to come to an end.”

So has “the lecturing and hectoring of party members that only we know how to win.” Along with the “belief that only those who belong to a small elite usually connected to Tony and Gordon have a right to lead the Labour Party.”

Lewis offered the most thorough self-criticism, but he was far from the only one.

A lot of the time the national press approach senior Blairites who are at the end of their careers about how to respond to Corbyn — the Charles Clarkes, David Blunketts or Blair himself. But they don’t have a career in Labour any more. They are chasing corporate cash, not ministerial careers. They are enjoying the freedom to be rent-a-gob pundits without the responsibility of building a party. So they are happy to give “kill Corbyn” quotes.

The current generation of “moderates and modernisers” doesn’t have any alternative but to deal with the strong party support for Corbyn. Some of them are clearly paranoid about losing their seats. Some want to try and steer the party back to the “centre” via “engagement” rather than some far-fetched plot — for now at least.

They recognise their weaknesses among the grassroots.

Which is a good thing. Ultimately it is a question of the grassroots that will determine whether Corbyn will be able to hold on to leadership of the Labour Party, and build support in the country. His position depends on how much the hundreds of thousands of new members can transform the party and its relations with the country.

But the relative disarray of the full-on Blairites helps. It gives a space to change the party.

------------------

THERE are two more interesting historical notes of interest from the formerly secret Home Office file on the miner’s strike which I reported on in these pages (M Star September 25).

Sergeants’ exam: The files contain one previously unreported example of how intense the policing of the Miner’s strike was. An October 1984 note says a Sergeant’s Exam had to be postponed. This was because the combination of the strike, the state opening of Parliament and constables sitting the exam was more than the system of sharing police throughout Britain during the strike could bear.

The note says there had to be “an emergency meeting of the Police Promotions Examinations Board” which was “arranged at 24 hours’ notice following strong representation from the President of ACPO.”

Chief constable of Humberside David Hall was the president of ACPO (The Association of Chief Police Officers). He was responsible for the National Reporting Centre which co-ordinated national policing of the strike.

The emergency meeting agreed to postpone that year’s Sergeant’s Exam, because “the problem is that this examination would normally take out something approaching 10,000 constables from provincial forces for a day out of a total pool of constable manpower of about 60,000. In view of the state opening [of Parliament] the Metropolitan Police will not be able to make available that day their normal contingent for policing the miner’s dispute.”

Initially the Police Federation was “strongly opposed” to delaying the exam, but was “persuaded” of the need. The exam was postponed for three weeks.

French convoy: There are also a flurry of documents from October 1984 relating to “a plan by the French Communist Trade Union, the CGT, to bring some 35 lorries of food and other goods to this country for distribution to striking miners.”

The convoy, which arrived via Dover, obviously greatly concerned ministers. Reports on the convoy were sent to Number 10 by the Home Office and “the security service” was consulted on the events. The government was very worried about the politically inspired international solidarity, because it was trying to wear down and isolate the miners.

Miners’ supporters said the government wanted to “starve them back to work.”

However the government decided not to try and use immigration law to prevent the convoy entering Britain because “the police are strongly of the view that attempts to prevent the supporters entering are more likely to precipitate than avert public order problems.”