It is always a risk putting a plenary at the end of a jam-packed one-day conference. Despite the lure of high-profile panellists, Caroline Flint MP, Chuka Umunna MP, David Aaronovitch and Jacqui Smith, and witty chair Simon Fanshawe, there is always the temptation to call it a day and run for an earlier train. However, the Progress Question Time session is ‘an event within an event’ – definitely no mass exodus!
Within an hour, questions ranged from François Hollande’s victory in France through to nuclear power and coalition councils. There was even a small conversation about the polar bear and the penguin local election candidates. The Hartlepool monkey, who I must confess I had conveniently forgotten about, was also raised.
Sitting at the back of the hall I was able to watch the body language of delegates who I noticed indicated with their tweeting habits what amused, intrigued or concerned them. From my perspective there were a couple of questions which drew the audience in and even caused fingers to hover over the tweet send button. A good old Progress debate can delay even the most ardent tweeter!
Predictably after the appearance of Rebekah Brooks at the Leveson inquiry, the first question was about Jeremy Hunt and David Cameron’s involvement in the BSkyB bid. Clichés such as it was a ‘political hot potato’ and ‘I wouldn’t have touched it with a barge pole’ were appropriately used. There was a general agreement that powerful people in politics talk to powerful people in the media. However if a minister is making a quasi judicial, commercially sensitive decision then conversations with media bosses absolutely must cease.
There is no doubt that the Leveson inquiry is currently a toxic issue for the government and as political activists, many of us are fascinated by its twists and turns. Back in the real world I’m not that sure that it is of major interest on the doorstep. During the local elections I was not questioned once about Leveson, phonehacking and politicians’ relationships with the media. Of course, the story may contribute to the general malaise towards the political system but for most it is just a story.
Of more interest is what Labour can do to help ordinary people get a job, grow a small business, get their kids through university and afford to have a decent standard of living. The final question of the Q&A session asked what will be Labour’s USP for 2015 and I think it is currently one of the most important issue for Labour party members. Jacqui Smith is absolutely right when she says that Labour needs to be the party that is on the side of ordinary people, fighting now in opposition and eventually in government. Chuka Umunna developed the theme saying Labour stands for ‘fairness and equality’ and that we can marry social justice with economic competence. Caroline Flint used an amazing soundbite ‘we need to get people back into work so they can care for themselves and their families’ and David Aaronovitch said Labour needed to stand for optimism and inclusivity. There is no doubt that Labour stands for all of the above (body language and claps from delegates proved that). Perhaps the bigger challenge is reinvigorating the public’s appetite for politics. To do that, as local activists we need to change the political narrative at the local level and that may take a little time. I hate to mention the elephant in the room (partly because any talk of animals may take the conversation back to the polar bear and the penguin) but with more local elections next year, the European elections in 2014 and the general election the year after, time is a luxury we do not have.
—————————————————————————————
Victoria Groulef is leader of the Labour group on Wycombe council
As I asked USP question I will give you my suggestion: JOBS and HOUSES. Everything else is secondary, even Education (and even if read out three times it is mainly – though not exclusively – a means to better employment). As for housing, my daughter moved her family two years ago to south Sweden, because she could not foresee any realistic possibility of ever affording a nice place here. She exchanged a (nice but small) flat in King Street, Hammersmith at £1,000 p.m. rent for a better one in a Lund suburb at £400 p.m., fully equipped and heating, water, electricity included. When a baby came, the housing company at once offered them a bigger ground floor flat with a small garden at only a modest increse in rent. That is what ordinary people need in this country. I feel the Labour leadership has a fair handle on the JOBS bit, but so far, and going on the record of 13 years in government, they have not taken the HOUSES part of the proposition seriously. So try Harder! In the village where I live no house affordable by normal wage-earners, either to rent or to buy, has been built since 1984, whereas the sprinkling of council houses built a few at a time from the 1930s onwards testify to the endeavours of the local authority to satisfy that ever present need.