Sir, - Michael Laver suggests (Opinion, November 13th) that Labour must get "rougher and tougher" under its new leadership. On that score he may be right, but it is difficult to agree with much else in his article.
To the Left, back to its roots - what in God's name does that mean? Is Professor Laver recommending a dialectic on the nationalisation of the commanding heights of the economy? Would he advocate that Labour reclaim the 1983 British Labour Party election manifesto, widely regarded as representative of that party's traditional socialist platform but unfortunately dubbed by one despairing Labour Party official as the "longest suicide note in history"?
Contrary to Professor Laver's suggestion, Labour has not been pandering to the middle classes. It is true that Labour is not as dependent on working-class support as it may once have been. It is fortunate that this is so. The working class on which Labour has traditionally relied for support has changed unalterably over the past 25 years and in its fractured state certainly no longer provides the building blocks for a formidable political movement.
In that context, Labour both in Britain and in Ireland has sought and must continue to advocate the importance of community, the common good and the obligation of one member of society to the other across all classes. A task made all the more difficult by those such as Professor Laver who regard any attempt by Labour to reform itself and make its values relevant in a new age as a drift to the right. - Yours, etc.,
Dail Eireann, Dublin 2.