This weekend I attended two thought-provoking meetings with local party activists. The first brought together women members from three constituency parties to discuss policies affecting women and how we can engage in campaigning. The second was a meeting of young Labour activists from right across Manchester.
It was great to see so many members, including new members, giving up their Saturday to attend these events. There was no doubting the anger and outrage at the policies of the ConDem government, and the determination to get them out of power as fast as we possibly can. But a common theme also emerged of uncertainty about what it is Labour’s fighting for – and how we’re carrying on that fight. Our story isn’t clear enough, members said, we’re not hitting hard enough.
Its true right now that the government’s message is the one that’s being heard: that we’re in a mess, that Labour caused it, and their drastic programme of deficit reduction is the only alternative now. But every one of those statements can and must be challenged, very very hard.
First, let’s remember that until 2008, our economy was growing strongly, with approaching full employment, and unemployment at a near-record low. A programme of investment had significantly improved our public services, yet by 2007 we’d also brought down the structural deficit to below the level we inherited in 1997, with the second lowest debt ratio in the G7. Yes when the financial crash hit in 2008, we were among the hardest hit – London’s one of the world’s top financial centres after all, we were bound to feel the pain. And yes, we should have regulated the financial sector more tightly – though let’s not forget the Tories were the ones who wanted to regulate even less.
But let’s remember too that our call, to pour money into the economy after the crash, was the right strategy, it saved homes, businesses and jobs. The Tories’ do-nothing policy would have destroyed our economy and thrown us deep into depression, with the poorest hit the most.
And now, they’re rushing to cut back public spending and slash the deficit in a way that imperils the recovery, and will destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs. That owes far more to Tory ideology than to economic sense. Labour’s more measured approach is surely right for the times.
We need to get that message out, but the party activists I met over the weekend expressed considerable anxiety that MPs and senior party figures simply were not getting it across. So it’s absolutely vital that we boil down our message to the basics, and repeat it ad nauseam. It’s vital, too, that we back it up with every local example of the cuts, and they harm they’ll do – something every local member can help us with.
But activists wanted something more – what’s Labour’s alternative vision, they asked. What kind of world do we want to build, and how can we help shape that? What’s the process for policy development, and when will it start to bear fruit? There was a hunger for a bold Labour vision, and a keenness to be involved in developing it.
The party’s policy-renewal process is under way, with the National Policy Forum meeting next weekend, and Liam Byrne taking responsibility for policy development. I’m convinced more than ever after the weekend I’ve just spent with members that it’s vital that it’s an inclusive process, and one that takes our policy programme well beyond mere incremental change: more of what lost us the last election simply isn’t good enough. Nor should we fall into the trap of believing that the agenda that served in the 1990s can simply be lifted to today.
The ConDems want to airbrush our achievements from history, they’re determined to destroy so much of what we did that was good. Those who argue for a vigorous defence of Labour’s past achievements are right to do so – but that won’t be enough.
We need to take time for a thorough review, starting with our Labour values, and willing to be genuinely progressive and bold. We need to explore and debate our ideas with one another, and to learn from other countries and cultures, including the devolved administrations too. We need our policies to be as well researched and evidenced as they can possibly be. But we also need to take the time to engage with and hear what the voters have to say, to root our policy thinking in the communities we inhabit and represent.
Most of all, we must resist the temptation to rush to set out our agenda for government, since circumstances will surely change. Think of our policymaking as building a house – let’s get the foundations right first. That means making the process itself a good one too. Vigorous debate and inclusivity will produce better policy, and by maximising members’ engagement, secure their buy-in for what emerges, and their willingness to campaign for it.
In short, it’s scary but we must hold our nerve, for we have the right building bricks and the tools. Let’s sharpen our attack, but while taking time for deeper reflection, and open ourselves to new thinking, to the widest range of ideas and views. That’s surely the right approach for a serious, courageous and principled opposition, an opposition that’s determined to return to power on a bold and radical programme – and an opposition that’s determined to force this vicious government out with just a single term.
In 2008 things went pear shaped under new labour and do not tell me it was global and nothing to do with labour. Full employment who the hell do you think you are talking to for god sake, you were nowhere near full employment what a shame. We had two wars which lets be honest we should have not had, to get money you decided to hit the welfare state, you had Brown trying to stop peoples benefits, people might be raring to go in your area, in mine the local party has been calling off meetings for lack of interest. I spent a life time in labour and the unions but after watching new labour and watching Miliband tell us welfare reforms would be backed by labour I may as well join the dam Tories. The country has changed and you tell us labour is raring to go, at what, your backing welfare reforms your backing changes to social housing oh yes i forgot your raring to get the rich child benefits back thats OK then.
Robert, it’s just worth pointing out that Labour “supports reform of the welfare system”. Does that mean we’re supporting the “welfare reform” that this government is introducing? Not at all. Similarly, we support the reduction of the deficit, but we don’t support the Condem’s deficit reduction plan. Please don’t feel that because the party is supporting something, it is supporting a morally devoid government’s strategy. There are hundreds of ways to reform our welfare system; most of them are far more progressive than the Tories’ strategies, and we need to make sure we’re on the right track. As for full employment, we had the highest employment rate in at least a generation, if not further. So Kate’s statement does hold true, even if perhaps it was a leeetle bit self-glorifying. And in 2008, the globe went pear shaped. A global recession is certainly not Labour’s fault. In the UK, it was worsened by our reliance on the financial sector, which should indeed have been more regulated, but Labour’s response to the recession was arguably one of the most effective in Europe. Great article, Kate!
Again thats total bull shit it was labour who put in the most Draconian medical to ever be used and they are using this for our troops who come back injured. For god sake it use to ask can you take a twenty pence piece off the table, now it asks can you like a cup off the table using your hands or stumps. labour is backing the welfare reforms of the Tory government. sorry this is not the labour party I spent 44 years in.
We are not backing the Tory’s welfare reforms. Look it up yourself if you don’t believe me. The welfare system does need to be changed, however, and we do support that ideal. If you’re going to dismiss an entire paragraph of valid points with “that’s total bullshit” then there’s not really much point in continuing. An internal debate is healthy, but only when both sides are being mature about it. I’m not aware of the MoD’s medical policy that we introduced, but then I think there are far bigger questions about why we went to war in the first place. That was in a previous government, under a past leader. It’s important to recognise that the whole point of this policy review is to make sure we don’t make the mistakes we’ve made before. We need people like you involved in that, but that’s only going to happen if you’re willing to contribute to the debate rather than dismiss it.