How Labour can win in the South of England (pt 2)
[The first half of this article was published yesterday]
Here are some key lessons about how to win in the South and increase support for Labour, from the people who actually managed it:
1. Good candidates - both Andrew Smith and Kelvin Hopkins were personally popular, decent, principled MPs, prepared to vote against their party when they thought it was wrong on issues from renewal of Trident to the Gurkhas.
While some MPs of all parties abused the expenses system to enrich themselves, Andrew has lived on Blackbird Leys council estate for more than thirty years, and Kelvin commutes from Luton to London daily, just like many of his constituents.
2. Hard work. Astonishingly, the Diamond/Radice pamphlet doesn’t devote a single sentence to local campaigning or the importance of talking to voters in winning elections. Their analysis is entirely from the perspective of national policy-making.
One key thing about active, local campaigning is that it reduces the influence of the media. Rather than trying to “triangulate” on pet topics of the right-wing press like immigration and welfare reform, personal contact with voters allows Labour to find out which issues really matter to people, and to take up and help sort out problems. If people find out about what Labour is up to in their area from their local MP or a Labour volunteer, they are going to be much more supportive than if they read the Daily Mail’s view about what Labour’s priorities are.
3. Oppose savage cuts. In Oxford, Labour attacked the Lib Dems for their support for savage cuts, and for their leader’s idea of breaking up the NHS. This was fantastically successful in persuading people to vote Labour. It is not fashionable to say this, but I believe that in 2010, Labour would have won more support if we had been tougher in our opposition to savage cuts, rather than listening to wealthy journalists whining about how we needed to show “credibility” by pledging to cut services.
4. Improve and extend public services. Extremely few people are interested in discussing “the role of the state after the financial crisis”. But extending recycling schemes so that people can recycle plastic, setting up playschemes for children, letting children swim for free and older people use public transport for free – all examples of concrete ideas for reform of public services which people put forwards, and which Labour won support by delivering.
Even in safe Tory seats like Salisbury, people are receptive to policies like the Living Wage or universal childcare. (It’s well worth reading the excellent article by our candidate in Salisbury).
5. Understand and call for action where the market is failing to deliver. On housing, childcare and social care for the elderly, Labour’s failure to act meant that there was too little provision, and that which was available was often poor quality and too expensive.
Local campaigners knew that parasites like bad landlords were wrecking communities in southern England, but government ministers blithely dismissed concerns and were more worried about the mythical dangers of “over-regulation”.
In political strategy, Labour should always be particularly focused on where the market is failing to deliver, because the instincts of the Tories and Liberal Democrats will always be to go against public opinion and refuse, on principle, to act to correct market failure.
This allows for popular campaigns where the overwhelming majority back, say, tough regulations on slum landlords or paying a living wage to cleaners, but the right wing parties refuse to act.
This is only the starting point for a discussion about Labour’s strategy over the next five years. Just because opposition to savage cuts, good candidates, improving and expanding public services and hard work were the keys to Labour’s success in southern England in 2010 doesn’t mean that they are a panacea for the next election.
For example, the advantage of having excellent, independent-minded local candidates is magnified when they have a team of staff and communications paid for by the taxpayer. In most Southern seats, our candidates won’t have that advantage next time.
On the other side of Luton, local candidate Gavin Shuker, who grew up in the town, managed to pull off one of the biggest shocks of the election – our new candidates should try to learn from his experience.
We need to develop new ways to get more activists involved in local campaigning, whether through community organising or other means, and build on Project Game Plan (silly name, great idea) to get more resources into local organising.
On policy, Labour needs to gather new ideas about where the market is failing, and which public services need to be expanded or improved. And there will be issues and challenges which are crucial in other parts of the South which didn’t apply in Oxford or Luton.
But I really think we will learn a lot more from the campaigns and the approach of people like Andrew Smith and Kelvin Hopkins than from pamphlets like “Southern Discomfort”.
We need to recognise that Labour fought the 2010 election with official policies in favour of a points based immigration system, videos at airports of immigrants being deported, locking up immigrant children and trying to starve those without children to force them to leave the country, unemployment benefits which had been halved since the 1980s, medical assessments by private companies to force sick people off incapacity benefits, and £44 billion in spending cuts including bigger cuts in the NHS than the Tories were planning.
Rather than helping to win us public support by addressing their concerns, our best results were found where our candidates didn’t mention these absolutely abhorrent and shameful policies and instead gave people reasons to be proud to support Labour.
I don’t know quite what more than this Diamond and Radice were thinking Labour could propose in terms of addressing immigration, welfare reform or a “credible” approach to reducing the deficit, as they don’t deign to put forward any specific proposals.
But we’ve already tried the approach set out in “Southern Discomfort”, and that’s why we only hold 10 seats in Southern England outside of London.
---------------------------
| Tweet |
Don Paskini is deputy-editor of LC. He also blogs at donpaskini. He is on twitter as @donpaskini
· Other posts by Don Paskini
Filed under
Blog ,Labour party ,Westminster
7 Comments || Add yours below
Reader comments
Very powerful analysis.
I don’t know how opposing the cuts will necessarily help come election in 2015 though.
It is important in itself, but the cuts will have come and gone by 2015 (if we can’t stop them) and I am unsure how much credit candidates will get for (ineffectually) opposing the cuts. I’m not sure “cut opposing” will be as successful a campaign tool come 2014-15 as it was for Andrew Smith and Kelvin Hopkins.
I would hope not to be stupid, ignorant or unsophisticated but I just cannot understand why well meaning people with whom I completely sympathise (such as the author of this article) seem to wilfully ignore the obvious.
The concerns of the vast mass of voters are perfectly clear: they are worried about jobs, their own if they have them, their children’s; they are worried about housing, how to keep their house, how to afford a house, how will their children ever be able to afford decent housing; they are worried about their pensions, will they have one, will it allow them to live decently; they are worried, above all, for the future of their children and their neighbours children. Which is just another way of saying they are worried about jobs.
These are the issues I hear in the saloon as well as the public bar.
The refusal of the Labour Party even to talk about these issues, let alone, formulate direct policy responses is the central reason for lost votes.
Now, either the Party leadership believes that no credible policy is possible; or it doesn’t believe it is the Labour Party’s role to formulate such policies. Whichever it is, they need to get out of the way and let more radical ideas flourish or watch other parties take ‘their’ votes.
People are not stupid. They know the truth when they hear it and they know when something is credible. All the rest of this talk is just tactical flim-flam.
“Rather than helping to win us public support by addressing their concerns, our best results were found where our candidates didn’t mention these absolutely abhorrent and shameful policies and instead gave people reasons to be proud to support Labour.”
So let me get this straight; the best way forward is just not to mention the shameful and abhorrent policies espoused by New Labour?
How do expect people to take your party seriously when those now in control are largely those involved in promoting and influencing those very policies? You may have a new leader who has expressed a modicum of regret for past mistakes; helpfully he even opposed the Iraq war (indeed those more cynical than I might even wonder if this was his chief qualification for the post).
As our American cousins say: “Where’s the beef?”
I don’t want a Newer Labour party which deludes itself. You can’t carry on re-hashing the failed policies of the past, diluting them somewhat and claiming that your new leadership demonstrates a renewed fitness and vigour. That won’t win you more seats in the South, and it won’t win you power at the next election.
I heartily agree with you that “they need to get out of the way and let more radical ideas flourish or watch other parties take ‘their’ votes”; I just haven’t seen the LEAST evidence of it happening.
That’s what makes the current situation so depressing, and why your question whilst interesting is rather beside the point. The kremlinology involved in examining how you can win more seats in the South may be intellectually diverting, but it can’t disguise the suspicion many of us have that in fact there is NO beef in the Newer Labour “burger”, and that the big fluffy bun is just the same as it has always been.
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
- Liberal Conspiracy
How Labour can win in the South of England (pt 2) http://bit.ly/aU70ya
- GORDON LYEW
RT @libcon: How Labour can win in the South of England (pt 2) http://bit.ly/aU70ya
- Paul Hufton
RT @libcon: How Labour can win in the South of England (pt 2) http://bit.ly/aU70ya
- Pucci Dellanno
RT @libcon: How Labour can win in the South of England (pt 2) http://bit.ly/aU70ya
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» The real agenda behind Telegraph’s abortion investigation
» How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists
» When disabled people want to work – employers can hold the back
» Revealed: the reality behind Workfare and why it doesn’t work
» Job snob? No, I’ve got the T-shirt
» Why country-by-country reporting matters to our wellbeing
» If Unions want to become stronger, they need to modernise
» Why work “reforms” in Spain are a warning for workers across Europe
» Five things you need to know about the NHS bill
» Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier. More Racist.
» Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government
|
62 Comments 15 Comments 23 Comments 10 Comments 24 Comments 19 Comments 16 Comments 83 Comments 203 Comments 85 Comments |
LATEST COMMENTS » Spike1138 posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » LondonJ posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » pagar posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » the a&e charge nurse posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Watchman posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Flowerpower posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Chaise Guevara posted on Job snob? No, I've got the T-shirt » bluepillnation posted on Job snob? No, I've got the T-shirt » Hannah posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Robin Levett posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Chaise Guevara posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Lee Griffin posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Robin Levett posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Robin Levett posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Dave posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation |









