Politics covers a huge canvass. More than ever, the politics of the moment is global. As a big player in world politics, the UK is usually in the thick of it, punching above its weight. But any politician worth their salt will tell you that all politics is local. For example, at my last round of surgeries: blocked drains, demolition of a council estate; motorcycle nuisance; and a coal health claim were among the issues raised. We need to ensure that the people at the surgery door know that resolving their problem is as important to the Labour government as the work on Northern Ireland, Middle East or North Korea. The day we forget that is the day that voters begin to think you are out of touch.
As the Labour party tries to map out the future of social democracy after nine years in government, it is ever more apparent that you have to renew politics for every generation. Engaging young people in this respect is relevant because the new voters of today were just 8 or 9 years old when the Tories were voted out of office. They have only known Britain under New Labour. We so often take for granted a shared experience, a collective memory of the Tory years, to help sustain Labour in office. It played a huge part in 1997 and 2001. But with every general election the impact declines. David Cameron is banking on it. Our challenge is to remind people constantly that the improvements they see in their neighbourhood, school or town centre are not accidents. Politics made them happen, more precisely, Labour politics.
Renewal, in the sense of building momentum behind a set of ideas, generating enthusiasm along the way, is difficult. I can’t remember a time of greater cynicism towards political parties and politicians. There is almost a common assumption that politicians are out for themselves. By any comparison with the past or other countries, our politics is clean. And the UK’s political party funding is more open to challenge and scrutiny than ever, thanks to this Labour government. You wouldn’t know it from the tone of recent coverage.
Some commentators have become bored with the issues that affect real lives. Attempts to talk about substance, what has changed for real people in recent years, are regarded as spin. They aren’t interested in 2.2 million extra jobs, a million fewer on benefits, 700,000 children lifted out of poverty, a million childcare places, the thousands of lives saved by slashing NHS waiting times, the 500,000 more young people walking away with real qualifications. Who cares that, nine years ago, 3 million workers in the UK did not have paid holidays, but do today?
It suits some commentators from right and left to pretend that new Labour and new Tory are the same – when they are worlds apart. The truth at the heart of British politics is that New Labour has shifted the axis of politics decisively away from Thatcherism towards greater social justice. On all of the fundamental questions – full employment, minimum wage, well funded public services, climate change, international development – the Tories do not even put up an argument against any more, in the hope that the public will forget that they opposed Labour policy on all of these issues.
David Cameron’s tactic, the deceit at the heart of his strategy, is to pretend that he is new Labour in all but name. As we chip away at the veneer of new Toryism, I believe the public will recognise the fake from the real article before the fraud succeeds.
In renewing our relationship with the electorate, winning the support of the new generation of voters is a priority for any political party. But in seeking to secure their support, it is all too easy to become patronising, simply by offering young people what they appear to want. For example, the Youth Parliament wants voting at 16. The line of least resistance for an MP is to agree. Yet a poll in 2004 showed that young people who were age 11 to 15 wanted voting reduced to below 16. Whereas a majority of 18 year olds wanted it kept at 18.
A further complication, widely ignored, is that young people are not one homogenous group. An 18 year old could be just entering university; they could have worked for two years in a shop or factory; or could already have three children. They might have no qualifications, a criminal record, or face homelessness. Young people are a diverse, ever changing class. They often live in parallel universes from each other.
A common mistake is to believe that, because they are at ease with 24 hour TV, texting, MySpace and YouTube, they have a different outlook to the rest of us. They don’t.
Although 18 to 24s as a group tend to vote more for Labour than the population as a whole, recent MORI polls show that their views are remarkably similar to the rest of the population. Aggregated data from MORI polls in 2006 showed the population ranked the top issues as NHS (36%) followed by Race/Immigration (35%), Crime (32%), Defence/terrorism (29%), and Education (24%). Young people broadly agreed, ranking the top issues as Race/Immigration (30%), Defence/terrorism (30%), Crime (28%), NHS (26%), followed by Education (21%).
Interestingly the Environment (10%) came 7th among the population, the same for young people (9%). Poverty, inequality and ‘the Live 8 agenda’ ranked 10th, with 6% and 7% respectively.
The obvious lesson is that it is important not to treat young people as though they are a separate species. All too often, New Labour is characterised as anti-young people, because of policies like ASBOs. Yet the reality is that the biggest victims of assault are young people. The biggest victims of street robbery are young people. Those prevented from using playgrounds, or hanging out in the local youth club by the threatening presence of others, are young people themselves.
Finally, a note of caution for anyone who is passionate about progressive politics. A recent YouGov poll of over 1800 people conducted during Labour party conference asked people how they saw themselves and how they saw the Labour party. Twenty one per cent saw Labour as fairly or very left wing, 29% saw Labour as slightly left of centre. Yet only 9% of voters saw themselves as fairly or very left wing and only 15% saw themselves as slightly left of centre. So half of the electorate see Labour as a left-of-centre party but only a quarter of the electorate see themselves as the same. Incidentally, only 3% of voters saw Labour as fairly or very right wing.
On every indicator, Tony Blair’s Labour party is still perceived to be more left wing than the electorate see themselves. A warning perhaps to anyone who believes that Labour’s problem in the past nine years is that we have not been left wing enough.
Put another way, it is a testament to Labour values and Tony Blair’s leadership that we have managed to ratchet up funding for public services, redistribute resources to areas of deprivation, and tackle poverty at home and abroad, whilst retaining public support in three successive elections.
For Labour to maintain a modern, progressive policy outlook, building on the past nine years, we should never forget that tomorrow’s battle is to win middle Britain. The election will be won by whoever wins the support of voters who see themselves as in the centre. When issues of leadership are addressed in the coming year, let no one demand of our next leader and deputy leader that they slow the pace of reform, return to some past agenda, retreat to some 1970s policies reheated like yesterday’s leftovers. That would be a recipe for defeat.
This article is adapted from a speech given at the Sheffield festival of politics in October
I enjoyed Caroline’s speech at the Festival of Politics in Sheffield. For me, the most important thing that Caroline identified was the fact that young people are not a homogeneous group and that it is folly for politicians of any hue to treat them as such. I was heartened to see that Caroline also pointed out that young people are not from Mars – they have very similar policy concerns as the rest of the country. The task is now to speak young people’s language and explain the core values of the Labour Party.
The ambitions of a voluntary citizen from any youth group, (whether in a individual capacity or lets say as part of a unit of willing and collective participants) i.e youth clubs, youth assemblies, youth councils, may, it could be said, places a great influence upon the triumph over the “neccessity for need” of this socially excluded group, over the “desire for want” in relation to a product or service delivery in a community, this would also include renewal and engagement in local labour party politics.
The average community youth worker, school governor, etc arguably, volunteers their service and exchanges ideas with, for and on behalf of the community in which they serve, intrinsically or extrinsically, with the target in mind of producing a summative result or an end product, such as a project or an amenity. This would also apply to young people.
A product or service is deemed only to be successful, if the “needs of the community” are balanced with the “wants of the individual” or arguably the “wants of a community” are balanced with the “needs of the individual” This may refer to any citizen, including of course, young people.
Empowering the citizen (youth) can only be achieved either scientifically or by triggering self actualisation. Progressively, the enlightenment of individuals to be set free collectively, to deliver in a good society or generally for the common good is not only cost effective, but furthermore a reduction in state intervention may even stimulate competition for ideas, which may enable New Labour to transit more favourably towards renewal.
The efficiency of any organisation, particularly from the voluntary and community sector can only be achieved through hard toil and a shared passion for collective thinking and functioning. The opportunity for setting of community objectives should be taken from all citizens, not just from a selective few of sitting representatives from local councils and political parties on boards and partnerships, who shape many of the third sector, this would include some charities.
The government may indeed provide the capital but unfortunately the labour will be expected to be provided by the community. Unfortunately the country is being brainwashed into thinking that communities can produce social entrepreneurs who not only work for no profit, but also work for nothing, not even a minimum wage.(Youth) Long term this will provide an avenue to downgrade local authorities (job losses, further restructuring) and trickle through the regional assemblies, which failed at the ballot box.
The country should not be fooled into the thinking that working free for the community will be solely for the good of society. It will be for the good of the government and the treasury.
The voluntary and community sector is not an avenue for the socially excluded to become more inclusive of society but a doctrine for providing labour and services on the cheap, in all public services.
It is nice to know that local MPs are starting to take youth and the younger generation seriously, albeit 18 Months too late.
Perhaps Ms Flint would like to comment online to my comments as being one of her labour party colleagues from Doncaster North, this would promote a more socially cohesive labour party, locally.