Building the happy society

In this guest post, Young Fabian Adam Leeder makes the case for redefining what we mean by progress.

.

What could be a greater idea for the 21^st century than a wholesale redefinition of how we define progress?

Increasingly, academics and legislators are questioning the definition of what where we want to go as a society, which has been held for decades.

Consistently, studies show that a wealthier society is not a happier one. Since the 1970s, when Richard Easterlin published his famous ‘Easterlin paradox’ – that as we become wealthier we are becoming more discontent – politicians of all stripes have become increasingly interested in whether we need to factor in happiness because a wealth increase doesn’t cover it.

So if a booming economy doesn’t make us happy, then why don’t we start defining progress in a more holistic way?

However, for this new definition of progress to truly become one of the big ideas of the 21^st century it has to overcome some simple questions. First, why both to change our current definition? How might that change work in practice?

First, why should we care about measuring happiness? Can health outcomes and education outcomes alone tell us whether the government of the day is providing its citizens with a better life? It is true, these things are important. Yet they are not questions that hold universal answers. What one person deems a good education, may not hold for another person – do we continuously test our young people or indulge in more holistic education?

By contrast, everybody wants to be happy. If, as people working in and around politics, we want to strive for a goal then surely we should seek out the ultimate goal – a happier population.

A more immediate prompt to care about happiness is the recent Unicef report which ranked the UK as having the lowest level of child happiness across 21 industrialised countries. Unhappy childhoods frequently lead to social problems in adulthood. That means we need to act now.

Secondly however, even if we deem it worthwhile to factor Gross Wellbeing Product (GWP) then such thinking is pie-in-the-sky if we can’t make it happen.

Of course measuring how happy people are is inherently subjective. However, a number of noted authors and institutions are now starting to build measurement systems that can accommodate how happy our population is.

Joseph Stigliz’s commission report ‘What is Social Progress’, which was established in France at the request of Nicholas Sarkozy, has produced interesting findings. The report was based on the firm principle that progress must be measured by the overall quality of people’s lives and offered up some good practice for doing so.

Similarly, the Office of National Statistics have also started to develop some measures.

We are far from having a definitive measure – there probably never will be one. Yet hard work is clearly underway to producing the best possible measure we can have. Political weight must be thrown behind those efforts.

It is clear that a shift in the direction of GWP is already underway. Lord Layard was hired as the previous government’s ‘happiness tzar’ and Ed Balls’ Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning programme when he was Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families both show steps in the right direction.

By developing sound measures for happiness, this ultimate aim of how we define progress can be put at the top of the agenda for policy makers in the 21^st century. What could be a greater goal toward which to direct our political efforts.

Anticipations has a new design

Over the past few months I have been working on a full redesign of Anticipations. I wanted to make the most of going full colour (which we did for the first time last edition) and give the magazine a fresh new look and feel. Yesterday that process (finally!) came to an end as the magazine went to print. It’s been a challenging but hugely rewarding task and I hope people like the final result. The magazine will be hitting member’s doorsteps in the coming weeks.

It was the final Anticipations of this exec year and as it went to print I realised how steep a learning curve it has been since I took over as editor last November. Learning how to use professional design software, understanding how to best commission content and, most of all, working out how to put it all together in a way that is both accessible and engaging has been challenging to say the least.

However, while it’s tough it’s also addictive. Not many people get the opportunity to edit a political magazine and the challenge can make you obsessive. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve got up in the early hours with ideas for new features or simply to tweak articles. It’s been a huge privilege to edit Anticipations and I’d love to continue doing it next year.

I’m always looking for ways to make Anticipations even better so please do get in touch with your comments and ideas.

James Green

Anticipations Editor

jgreen@youngfabians.org.uk

A reminder of what this election is all about

Yesterday all three party leaders attended the Citizens UK May Day assembly. The biggest meeting of the General Election campaign, it is testament to the power of community organising to influence the decision making process. The meeting was attended by 2,500 people from 160 community organisations including churches, mosques, synagogues and trade unions.

I was fortunate enough to visit a Citizens UK meeting a few months ago. I had become interested in community organising following my time on the Young Fabians trip to Ohio for the Obama campaign. Barack Obama had been a community organiser in Chicago before running for the presidency and had talked on many occasions about the role that it can play in engaging communities in the issues that affect their lives.

At that meeting I was struck by just how powerful community organising can be. The room was rammed full of residents, passionate about bringing about change in their local communities. I met Muslims, Jews, Christians, Trade Unionists and many others. Few belonged to a political party but all were deeply involved in politics.

The Citizens UK assembly serves as a pertinent reminder of what this election is all about. In recent weeks there’s been a great deal of talk about which party is up and which party is down. But this election isn’t about the parties. It’s about the people. With polling day now on the horizon it’s important to remember that.

James Green is Anticipations Editor and Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Cheltenham. He blogs at www.jamesgreen.org.uk.

The Leaders’ Debates: My Verdict

The impact of the Leader’s Debates has been far greater than most people had predicted. I always thought they were going to be important. I just didn’t realise that they would become the backbone of the General Election campaign. For the last three weeks the debates have dominated the headlines. From the build up, to the debates themselves, to the blow by blow post-analysis.

What has struck me most of all is simply how many people have been watching them. Every part of Cheltenham I go to whether it’s St Mark’s or Oakley, Leckhampton or St Paul’s, people are tuning in. That can only be a good thing for democracy. The Leader’s Debates have reengaged a cynical public in the political process. At such a critical moment for our politics that is crucial.

But what I have most valued about the debates is that they have focused on the substance. They have offered a welcome change from the yah boo politics that has characterised British political life for far too long. Four and half hours of detailed policy debate – a real change from the tit for tat of Prime Ministers Questions.

I hope these debates mark the start of a new more nuanced political debate in this country. On the doorstep people tell me that they want the detail. The popularity of the debates highlights just how things can change when politicians begin to give it to them.

James Green is Anticipations Editor and Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Cheltenham. He blogs at www.jamesgreen.org.uk.

Vote for substance. Vote Labour.

As we enter the final two weeks of the General Election campaign all is still to play for.

Labour were the underdogs at the start. Now, following the Leader’s Debates, all bets are off. We are in unchartered waters. The only thing that’s certain is that this will be a transformative General Election.

Labour have been talking about the big issues from the outset and that is what we must continue to do. The twin crises of MPs’ expenses and the credit crunch provide the backdrop for this General Election campaign. People want substance not spin. They want practical measures to fix our broken politics and bold action to secure the economic recovery. Rarely has the outcome of an election been so important.

Labour are on the right side of these arguments. On political reform we are have pledged in our manifesto to hold a referendum on changing the voting system. This could herald the most substantial reform to Britain’s electoral system since women got the vote. On the same day we’ll hold a referendum on a fully elected House of Lords. My view is simple – if people make our laws they should be elected. And we’ll set up a Royal Commission to lead the way to a written constitution. People demand more than soundbites when it comes to constitutional reform. Labour’s manifesto is rammed full of substantial policies.

Yet, despite their rhetoric, on all these issues the Tories fall short. They talk about giving people greater power but refuse to back Labour’s plans to change the voting system. They talk about being progressive but blocked Labour’s efforts to remove the final hereditary peers from the House of Lords. Gordon Brown put it best when he said “the future will be progressive or conservative, but it will not be both.”

And on the great challenge of our time, securing the economic recovery, the Tories would put the long-term future of Britain’s economy at risk. The growth figures released last week showed that, while we are coming out of recession, the recovery is still fragile. If we make the wrong decisions and cut too early, as the Tories would have us do, we could risk falling into a double dip recession. Yet the Tories promise a new tax giveaway seemingly every week. Taking £6 billion out of the economy in National Insurance is the wrong thing to do. As is giving a £200,000 tax cut to the country’s 3,000 richest estates. The Tories priorities aren’t Britain’s priorities.

The decisions that are made in the next Parliament will shape life in Cheltenham and across the country for a generation. We need to make the right calls. The Tories were wrong on the recession and they are wrong on the recovery. They were wrong on the causes of our broken political system and they are wrong about how to fix it.

There is a real choice at this election. Vote for substance. Vote Labour.

My concerns about the Tories’ new European friends

Today’s Leader’s Debate, taking place here in the South West, will focus on foreign policy. I hope Gordon Brown will take Cameron to task about his friends in Europe.

Cameron’s decision to leave the mainstream centre right grouping in favour of a fringe group including homophobes and far right nationalists shows a serious lack of judgment. The views of his new partners on homosexuality, anti-semitism and climate change are massively out of kilt with the mainstream British majority. My outrage is likely only matched by that of the Tories’ old partners. Why Cameron would choose to abandon Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy for his current friends I will never understand.

Michael Kaminski, who leads the Tory MEPs in Europe, spoke out against the commemoration of the brutal massacre of Polish Jews in the town of Jebwadne during World War Two. Members of the same party have described homosexuality as a “pathology” and are outspoken climate change deniers. And what of Cameron’s other partners? His Latvian allies join in the annual commemoration of the Waffen SS. Concerning to say the least.

From climate change to terrorism, from international crime to the financial crisis, the great challenges we face go beyond our borders. We can face them alone, consigned to the fringes of Europe, with the Tories. Or continue to punch our weight in a crucial partnership with Labour.

Last week’s debate showed that, while Cameron may be able to do the set piece speeches, when pressed on the issues that matter he falls short. There is a real choice at the next election. I hope today’s debate will highlight that even more.

James Green is Anticipations editor and Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Cheltenham. He blogs at www.jamesgreen.org.uk.

Cameron overstepped the mark today

Day three and the election campaign has taken a concerning turn. David Cameron has told a Catholic magazine that there should be a review of the abortion time limit and that he backs a reduction to as little as 20 weeks.

There is a strong tradition of free votes on issues of conscience like this. The fact that he has made this pledge in his first interview of the campaign means abortion is likely to be a key theme for the Tories. Whatever one thinks of the issue – I am proudly pro-choice – I do think that politicians need to be wary of playing politics with such matters.

I am not alone in raising these concerns. In the last General Election a Telegraph poll found that 60% of voters wanted abortion kept out of election campaigning. People have real concerns about the politicisation of women’s bodies. Pledges on abortion should not be used as bargaining chips to win people’s votes.

Of course constituents have the right to know what their prospective MPs feel about these issues. I have already outlined my views on abortion to Cheltenham residents who fall on both sides of the argument. But when it comes to issues of conscience political leaders must tread carefully.

Cameron overstepped the mark today.

James Green is Anticipations Editor and Labour’s Parliamentary Candidate for Cheltenham. He blogs at www.jamesgreen.org.uk.

My first hustings…

The starting gun has been fired for the General Election campaign in Cheltenham. We may not know the date of the election yet. But as the students who attended the recent hustings at Gloucestershire University saw, the parties are very much in campaign mode. There were the party political sideswipes and top lines clear to hear. But what was most exciting about the discussion was that it didn’t descend into party political point scoring. The debate was most successful in that it offered an open and honest appraisal of the different parties’ policy positions.

On higher education we were all agreed on the need to prioritise investment (though I remain unconvinced to say the least about whether the Tories would put their money where their mouth is). Where we disagreed was on Labour’s aspiration to see 50% of young people choose university. Both of the other candidates viewed this as an unrealistic goal and the Liberal went as far as saying that it was undesirable. My response. They may not believe in Labour’s aspiration, but over 50% of young people from every socio economic group do. These people want to go to university. We should ensure that they can.

A woman in the audience put the argument best when she said, “because of this government my children were the first in our family to go to university. I am incredibly proud of them.” A point well made.

The discussion continued in a similar vein throughout the night. Thrust and counter thrust, each candidate jostled for position. But I felt throughout the debate that I had one weapon in my arsenal that they couldn’t match. Labour’s record in government.

When a resident raised the issue of crime I could tell him that crime was down by a third and that Labour had invested at record levels to ensure he had a dedicated police team in his area.

When a member of the audience talked about the challenges of his disability I could point to the Disability Discrimination Act and Labour’s work driving through the most comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation in the world.

When a student asked about higher education I could tell him that investment was up 25%, research activity had doubled and that students were responding with their feet with 300,000 more in university since 1997.

It was my first hustings and at times I felt like I was on the high wire without a net. But it was a great experience and one that offered me the opportunity to make the case for Labour in Cheltenham loud and clear.

James Green is Anticipations Editor and Labour PPC for Cheltenham. He blogs at www.jamesgreen.org.uk.

Michael Foot: A reminder of Labour’s idealism

The Labour Party has come a long way since Foot’s leadership and the dark depths of Thatcher and 1983. I may have disagreed with Foot on policy. But I stand firmly in his camp when it comes to the purpose of politics. Tories may reduce politics to cynicism and pragmatism. For Labour it must always be about ideology, values and mission. Even in our darkest days we never gave up on that. As Gordon Brown said of Foot today, “[he] was a man of deep principle and great idealism.” That is what we all aspire to in the Labour movement.

So what can we learn from Michael Foot? In many ways British politics has changed irrevocably since his day. The stark left/ right divide that characterised the 1980s has been replaced by a cross-party scramble for the centre ground. But when you scratch beneath the surface the differences between left and right remain clear to see. Today is not the day for electioneering. However, Foot’s death serves as a pertinent reminder of what we’re fighting for at the next election.

A rich Labour tradition.

Politics is about more than promises. But if that’s all you’re offering. My advice is, don’t break them.

Yesterday’s announcement about Lord Ashcroft confirmed my suspicions in more ways than one. That one of the Tories’ chief donors and strategists is a non dom is hardly surprising. For a decade Tory leader after Tory leader has tied himself in knots trying to protect him. Yet the real indictment of the Tories is not simply that they hid this truth from the public. It’s that they placed a man at the heart of their operation who was happy to shortchange the exchequer at the same time as he pumped money into their key marginals. Flashy leaflets took priority over tax for public services. That says as much about Cameron as it does about Ashcroft himself.

It’s a matter of weeks until the election and David Cameron continues to refuse to put meat on the bones of his plans for the country. His speech to the Tory spring conference yesterday was another example of Cameron’s cynicism. A speech with as much substance as he had notes. He might as well have saved us all the time and simply said, “look at me, I’ve remembered loads!” The first time he did it (according to him that is. He didn’t actually do his 2007 conference speech without notes. They were sitting right in front of him) it was cute. The second time it was just smarmy.

Across the country the public are getting smart to Cameron’s game. A Comres poll in tomorrow’s Independent shows Tory support falling and Labour as the largest party in Parliament. Local people from across Cheltenham have been swamped by Ashcroft leaflets. The Gloucestershire Echo revealed yesterday that Tory HQ have plowed over £30,000 into the town. But residents know that it takes more than expensive design work to win their support. Politics is about more than promises. But if that is all you’re offering and you refuse to outline concrete plans. My advice is, don’t break them.