Apathy is the key word of this election. Lifelong Labour voters declare that they will never vote for the party again. Expected turnout is estimated as low as 61 percent - a full 10 percent less than in 1997, which itself saw the lowest election turnout since before the Second World War. A worried Millbank report estimates that Labour could lose up to 120 seats through a combination of the lack of interest among young people and the abstention of older voters. Labour's biggest fear is that its total votes may be less than the number of non-voters.

If all of these things happen, New Labour has no one but itself to blame. The relief and goodwill which millions felt in 1997 as Labour finally beat the Tories have dissipated. Blair's Labour has few friends apart from in high places, and the enthusiasm which once greeted him has gone completely. Indeed it is hard to understand why his government stands so high in the polls when few have a good word to say for its leader.

Of all the words which could describe the political sentiments of many people who are choosing not to vote in this election, apathy is one of the least appropriate. These people are angry, disgusted, disillusioned or hostile in varying measures. But they often care very strongly about political issues. The atmosphere in Britain today is in fact highly political--a range of questions from rail privatisation to anti-capitalism to the state of education influences people. Their 'apathy' stems from the fact that the main political parties look and sound the same, and there is no space in established politics for any alternative.

This feeling affects supporters of all the main parties but is strongest among Labour supporters who did expect something different after 1997. New Labour's policies have been a repeated kick in the teeth for old Labour: tuition fees, privatisation, tax cuts, selection in schools, racist attacks on asylum seekers. Now the new manifesto takes Labour's attacks on to a different plane. It is a green light for extended privatisation of the NHS and for further attacks on every aspect of the public sector. Observer columnist Andrew Rawnsley compared Labour's 1997 manifesto with its latest offering and found the following: 'Labour is opposed to the privatisation of clinical services which is actively being promoted by the Conservatives' (1997), had become by 2001, 'We will create a new type of hospital--specially built surgical units, managed by the NHS or the private sector--to guarantee shorter waiting times' (20 May 2001). Even Rawnsley was moved to comment, 'Sometimes you have to pinch yourself to be sure that you are not dreaming. Among the "Ambitions for Britain" set by a Labour government is the ambition to bring the private sector into the running of the health service.'

The argument put by the government and its supporters is that private funding is the only way to improve the NHS, the tube and all the other areas where they are trying to bring in the private sector. Yet privatisation has so far been disastrous in delivering services. The railways have been ruined by privatisation, which has succeeded in creating havoc, delivering the most expensive and least reliable railway in the world. The areas which have been privatised in the NHS, for example, cleaning, have proven unsatisfactory and unpopular. And the gains in terms of money have gone not to patients but to the private companies, which are even now lining up to make a killing from the sell-off of our health. As Andrew Rawnsley revealed, 'On the quiet, government advisers have told health companies that anything is possible and everything is up for grabs, from taking over failing health authorities to running GP surgeries.'

No wonder former Labour supporters are sick of the government's policies. They have voted Labour in what millions believed would usher in an era of greater democracy, accountability and fairness. Instead democracy has been denied. Anyone who tries to debate these issues inside the Labour Party finds it more and more difficult. The new manifesto, which cannot be supported by any in the party apart from a handful of Blairite MPs, has been met without a hint of opposition from the left.

The very peculiar political situation in Britain stems from a combination of disillusionment with Blair alongside a refusal to accept the Tories' agenda. Instead there is a sizeable growth of opposition which takes at least partly a left wing direction. This means there is an electoral space to the left of Labour which the Socialist Alliance and the Scottish Socialist Party are trying to fill. Their campaigns are galvanising socialists up and down the country.

But even more important is what the socialist challenge represents. It is an expression of left wing views, and it also stands for direct democracy. Since 1997 many thousands of people have decided that they will have to rely on their own actions, not those of politicians, in order to win change. Protesters at Dudley hospitals, Faslane, the London tube, in the post office, against the Balkan War, in opposition to tuition fees, or council house sell-offs, have bypassed the 'normal' channels of politics. The real lesson of this election is that such protests will have to grow if we are to beat the 'reform' which Blair has on offer for us. The test of the Socialist Alliance will be whether it can attract votes from disaffected Labour supporters, and whether it can turn that into an ongoing united campaign based on direct action which can begin once again to build confidence and organisation inside the working class movement.

Neil Thompson, Socialist Alliance candidate in St Helens

It's almost impossible to underestimate the breath of fresh air blowing through rank and file politics following firefighter Neil Thompson's decision to defect to the Socialist Alliance from the Labour Party. Neil was once constituency secretary in St Helens South, and now he is contesting the seat.

It took 17 years of Tory governments before Martin Bell was provoked into becoming the darling of Middle England by standing against arch-Tory sleazemaster Neil Hamilton in Tatton, Cheshire. It has taken just one four-year term of office for New Labour's Millbank apparatchiks to incite its own such rebellion. The imposition of multi-millionaire former Conservative communications director Shaun Woodward as the candidate in the solid Labour seat has been regarded as not just a bitter pill being administered by the leadership but, by many, as a poisonous one. They see him as a blatant careerist, turncoat Tory trying to find his way back into government. But, as Neil Thompson explains, the more sinister message from Millbank embodied by Woodward and the fixing of his selection panel has also been decoded, 'Mandelson's gone, Alistair Campbell's going after the election, or so we're led to believe, so they're short of a spindoctor,' says Thompson. 'Woodward was a Tory spindoctor used by the Tories to continually damage Neil Kinnock. So after the election they want to use him to help them carry on their New Tory project.'

Asked to position himself politically, Thompson, currently the chair of Merseyside and Cheshire FBU region, describes himself as from the traditional centre of the Labour Party. He was a vociferous opponent of the abolition of Clause Four, though, as he says, 'Then they argued that any price was worth paying for power. I argued against that, and look at the price that's been paid. Behaving like Tories in government should never have been the price of power.'

Thompson's defection to the Socialist Alliance has brought the project in St Helens into national media focus, but it's also highlighted the issues that affect working people both in and out of the Labour Party. And because of the type of people now showing interest in what's happening at the grassroots in St Helens, one gets a sense that here, perhaps more than anywhere else, the Socialist Alliance is on the verge of an (unpredicted) breakthrough.

Within just five days of announcing his candidature Neil's campaign coffers had more than £1,200. Unsolicited donations have been sent from across the country by ordinary people wanting to support Neil's David v Goliath fight for what they call traditional Labour values--including one £10 note from a pensioner Labour councillor in Kent. And the Socialist Alliance national office has received many offers of help in St Helens, ranging from a dozen still Labour Party members from Preston who want to come and canvass for Neil in St Helens, to comedian Mark Thomas's offer of help.

'I've been completely gobsmacked by the different types of people who say they'll support me. There's a lot of what you call ordinary working class people who tell me they'll be voting for me because they're not going to vote for a Tory, and that's what Woodward was and always will be,' says Neil, who describes the decision to break with Labour as the hardest of his life--especially as he's spent years arguing for change from within.

'Woodward's at the extreme right of New Labour, and that they'd done this to us here shows the contempt they have for us. He supported Margaret Thatcher, whose pit closures decimated St Helens. And he voted against the Social Chapter, and if we had that we might not have lost our two glass factories. To have put him in here shows their contempt. But it's not just the ordinary working class that feel the contempt. I've had doctors, teachers, lecturers, even lawyers coming up to me and saying they'll vote for me, and it makes you realise that they're feeling the squeeze too.'

Hampstead and Highgate: Monday 14 May.

At 6.45pm Peter Robbins, 25 years in the Labour Party and chair of the meeting, puts a list of reasons to be angry with New Labour on the wall. All will be invited to add to it. It measures nearly ten feet in length. By 7.30pm about 100 people fill the room. Mark Steel kicks off with a cracking speech asking, where has the enthusiasm which greeted the 1997 election victory gone? Maddy Cooper, the candidate, delivers a superb speech ripping into New Labour's appalling record--local MP Glenda Jackson had given no help to a local campaign to keep Wellesley Road Home for Older People open. How could she, as it was the Labour council which had been trying to close it? Liz Davies followed with a trenchant, closely argued but very listenable argument as to how democracy had been closed down in New Labour. It was now beyond reform and in thrall to big business.

The brilliant opening sparked discussion. A Wellesley Road campaigner pays tribute to Maddy. Austin, a pensioner activist, boils over with rage at the miserable 75p increase they received. Another long-standing Labour activist asks, what will happen after the election? The reply is that the Socialist Alliance will not disappear. It will fight in local elections and be involved in campaigns and acts of solidarity. One woman, an asylum seeker from the US in the 1950s, offers the slogan, 'A vote for Blair is a vote for Bush.' No one argues it is best to stay in the Labour Party and fight. A further 25 people give their names to help in the campaign and over £400 is raised. All this after the local Socialist Alliance has only been in existence for six weeks.

Holborn and St Pancras: Wednesday 16 May

As I arrive I am told that I am the 100th person. The audience eventually tallies 125. Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the civil servants' PCS union, gives a forceful speech cataloguing New Labour's misdeeds. Looking around, it is clear how pleased people are to hear a union general secretary reflecting their view of the world. The chair, Caroline Holding, an ex Labour councillor, then introduces Candy Udwin, the Socialist Alliance candidate who draws on her battles against cuts over the years. She reminds the audience how unpopular Frank Dobson is locally.

A shop steward from the giant Mount Pleasant sorting office talks of the looming confrontations in the post. A university lecturer attacks Blair's warmongering. A woman speaks of the Palestinian struggle. Pat Stack wittily comments on how irrelevant the Socialist Alliance is. In publication after publication the Socialist Alliance was attacked for being irrelevant. He hopes the Socialist Alliance will become more 'irrelevant'.

In a telling contribution Alan Walter argues that Labour support is fragmenting--a number of tenants' associations have distributed Socialist Alliance material, his CWU branch has agreed to circulate both Labour Party and Socialist Alliance election literature and Bangladashi women have agreed to a meeting with the Socialist Alliance. All had been stalwart Labour supporters in the past. Ken Loach sends a message apologising for not coming to speak. His excuse--he is editing the Socialist Alliance election broadcast! He is universally forgiven. Over £500 raised and 50 more people volunteered to help in the campaign.

Two brilliant Socialist Alliance meetings in one week. One in the bright, newly refurbished Hampstead Town Hall, the other in the basement social club of St Aloysius Church in Somers Town, near Euston station. I saw both as I was taking Committee to Defend Asylum Seekers material to them. Both constituencies are mixed--leafy Hampstead includes Kilburn and Archway. Holborn and St Pancras is much poorer, but contains Bloomsbury. What struck me were the similarities. Both meetings attracting more than expected, both with respect for each other's opinions, both audiences consisting overwhelmingly of Labour and ex Labour Party members with a serious commitment to wanting a better world, the absence in either of any argument to stay in and fight to change New Labour, both Labour candidates regarded as lacklustre and discredited, both meetings firing people up with the realisation that they can change history.

East London candidates, local doctor Kambix Boomla and Ford worker Berlyne Hamilton, on the campaign trail

Six months ago I was not convinced of the possibility of standing a candidate in Warwick and Leamington. Two medium-sized towns with a small organised left and a seat which was a Tory stronghold until 1997 might not seem the most fertile territory for the Socialist Alliance. Thankfully now it is being proved through practice to be a sound move. The Alliance has sprung into existence in Leamington, raised £1,000 and begun to gain local recognition in three hectic weeks. The campaign has brought together a coalition of socialists, including ex Labour Party members, anti-racism/war/capitalism campaigners, trade unionists, school students and environmental activists in a consensual coalition. The absence for many years of an organised left beyond the ranks of a small SWP branch has meant building the Alliance from scratch. We now send out a regular mailing and e-mailing to 80 people and about 20 of us enjoy lively weekly campaign meetings.

It is an unusual experience for a socialist to find their politics in demand by BBC West Midlands, at meetings with hospital Unison convenors and at a local community fete, complete with an opportunity to challenge the Tory and UKIP candidates to demonstrate their bhangra dancing credentials. In previous times Leamington's socialists could only have dreamed of the possibility of hiring the local cinema for a Mark Steel meeting and book signing, advertised in the local press, Waterstones bookshops, and windows and cars around the town.

As this constituency is a Labour marginal--Plaskitt being its first Labour MP with a majority of only 3,000 votes--I was expecting to face protests from those who thought that we would allow a Tory victory. I have been surprised by the lack of such responses. Campaigners have come back with tales of local Labour Party members--maybe even councillors--expressing the view that it would be no bad thing for the Labour Party to lose a few marginals and therefore give Blair a kick up the backside or a bloody nose. Our campaign meetings are apparently better attended and far more lively and relevant than the last Labour Party AGM--no surprise really given the experience, skills and number of activists involved. Having announced at work that I was standing as a Socialist Alliance candidate, I have subsequently discovered that three colleagues are ex Labour Party members who have left in despair and have expressed support for our campaign. This week we shall take the red flag back to the Labour Party, along with our manifesto at its launch event outside Leamington's Labour Party shop. We don't anticipate them accepting it graciously. During Blair's recent visit to Leamington, one of his minders became so rattled by a Socialist Alliance member that he shouted defensively, 'And what have you ever done for the working class? F*****g nothing!'

This campaign has surprised a number of us who have been involved in many worthy struggles comprising not the masses but the half dozen usual suspects. The Socialist Alliance has attracted the interest and support of many people who have previously felt ignored and disenfranchised by the homogenous nature of the pro-privatisation, pro-business major parties. This new alignment of the left has also awoken many individuals who had become disheartened and disengaged. We're talking politics on the streets, in the pub, outside the station, in the post office, and have been inspired with the possibilities for concerted and creative political activity. At a time when the barbarism of society is very evident, it seems that in Leamington the possibilities for socialism are beginning to be put back on the agenda.