Labour party conference went well compared to the prophesies of infighting and disarray that some predicted. Peter Mandelson’s speech was the best received, combining a sense of theatricality which all politicians need sometimes, with a strong challenge to the Tories. Manchester wasn’t the easy ride the Tories had hoped for with divisions over Europe dominating the start of the week, and the controversy over Michal Kaminski’s invitation casting a pall. But then, Cameron didn’t need to have a spectacular conference. He just needed to get by without major mishap, and the latest polls suggest he did. In a recent Guardian poll, the Conservatives had a lead of 17 points over Labour, exactly the same as they did before the conference season. So despite having a relatively upbeat conference, why has Labour not made any gains?
The first reason is that the party still lacks an over-arching narrative about the vision of Britain Labour holds for the future. This is a point which Progress has made in this column before, but it bears repeating. We heard plenty about what Labour would ‘do’ for people, but too little about why, and where we expected to end up. There was much in the prime minister’s speech, quite rightly, about safeguarding jobs and providing opportunity for all. But too often the next questions were: What for? And why Labour? By contrast, Cameron’s ‘view from the summit’, while hackneyed and over-simplistic, at least gave a sense of forward momentum. At times Gordon Brown’s speech felt like a shopping list of policies designed to placate different audiences. What else could explain taking a progressive policy such as sheltered support for teen mums and turning it into a confirmation of everything the bigoted right would wish to believe about young girls getting pregnant on purpose to bag a council flat?
A second reason for Labour’s lack of progress is the continued fallout from expenses. There was an alternative to the retrospective mess that Sir Thomas Legg has created, and that was a call from the grassroots of the Labour party to let local constituencies make a decision about their MP’s expenses. Instead the NEC’s ‘star chamber’ has deselected four MPs, but left all the others untouched. Decisive action should have been taken before the summer recess, or parliament should have continued sitting until an outcome was reached. Either way, the fact that MPs are continuing to threaten revenge on the prime minister or on Legg, does them no favours in the eyes of the public. Some in Labour’s ranks seem genuinely shocked that the public blames the government for expenses more than the Tories who have arguably been more extravagant with their moats and duck houses. The difference is that Cameron acted quickly to push offenders out of the party, and held an open primary, in the case of Totnes, which showed the public that things were going to be done differently from now on. From the public’s perspective, Labour has taken very little action.
This could have been so different. A referendum on electoral reform would have made the argument that Labour was willing to enter into an age where political parties do not win power simply to form ‘strong’ governments but to govern in the interests of the people. A citizens’ convention would have helped to restore the severed trust between people and their democratic institutions by putting them at the heart of a new settlement for democracy. Instead the prime minister announced an electoral reform change that few were campaigning for (AV), at a time when we cannot determine whether the reform will happen (after the election). The referendum legislation is not even planned to be introduced in this parliament. Neither are there any plans for introducing a recall law, even though it enjoys cross-party support.
What was stopping the prime minister saying that proposals for a fully elected House of Lords would be put forward in this parliament? The constitutional reform and governance bill which is currently going through parliament is little more than a ragbag of tidying up measures such as allowing peers to retire and removing byelections for hereditary peers. A reform bill including Lords reform, electoral reform, strengthening of parliament, recall, primaries and greater devolution to local government and cities, could have been a game changer if announced, forcing Cameron to defend the status quo, and signalling to the public that Labour was serious about giving power to the people.
There is still time to take some of these reforms to the next stage. Progress will be supporting Unlock Democracy’s campaign for a citizens’ convention bill and we will be backing an amendment by Martin Linton MP to the constitutional reform and governance bill which will provide for a referendum on reform of the electoral system. We will also be challenging Labour’s NEC to trial the use of primaries for any selections in winnable seats between now and the next election. Of course democratic renewal is only one side of a push for reform which should also include further personalising public services, and redirecting public expenditure to the early years to give young people the best start in life. But the prime minister said in his acceptance speech for the Labour leadership that building trust in democracy would be his priority – let’s keep him to that.