Labour Lifts-Off Into 2012

Ed Miliband is seeking to relaunch his leadership and confound his critics by unveiling a clear vision for the Labour party of 2012.

On Monday, he began a media blitz that outlined what a future Labour government would look like. His speech at the OXO Tower guaranteed that Labour would continue to promote fairness and social justice “even in tough times”, but made it abundantly clear that it would be “a different party from the one we were in the past.” At a stroke, Ed appeared to banish the ghosts of New Labour while allaying the fears of those critics who believe he wants to take party policy back to the days of tax-and-spend.

It was a forceful speech made by a leader with fire in his belly. Polling at the end of 2011 revealed that while the Prime Minister enjoys a +5 point personal rating on his job performance, Ed is burdened with a -17 rating, putting him just ahead of Nick Clegg on -19. Labour’s lacklustre support among the electorate has led some erstwhile friends of the leader to openly criticise his handling of the party. Ed needed to begin the New Year with a gutsy show of character that made clear where he stood on the policy spectrum- especially in regards to the economy.

However, while the delivery was impressive, the content revealed that there is still some way to go before Ed and the party can make a coherent case on where they stand. The references to “tough times”, and admittance that “whoever is the next Prime Minister will not have money to spend” suggest that Ed is adopting the doctrine of fiscal conservatism that underpins the Coalition’s support and was recently advocated by the authors of ‘In the Black Labour’. While Ed attempts a positive spin on this by arguing that he will co-opt the private sector in the mission to improve the living standards of the vulnerable, the underlying principle still resembles that which motivated New Labour. The rhetoric also contradicts messages coming from elsewhere in the Labour Party, especially from the Shadow Chancellor, who in previous months has argued that short-term stimulus is more important than immediate fiscal contraction.

Contracting-out the task of providing fairness and social justice to the private sector isn’t exactly what some on the left want to see Labour support. What is more distressing, however, is the lack of inventive policy positions or promising reforms that would get the electorate excited about a future Labour government.

This is where think-tanks like the Fabian Society step in. In the recent Fabian Review¸ society chair Andrew Harrop argued that Labour should move away from ‘short-term Keynesianism’ and Osbornomics alike by committing to spending, rather than prohibiting it, but only spending on investment and unemployment relief.  He also suggested that Labour could steal a march on the Coalition and reboot the economy with a stimulus programme based on short-term tax cuts. The promise of a fiscal stimulus that appeals to the electorate and outflanks the Right could put Ed’s name back in lights- provided he retains a commitment to strong infrastructure spending and the welfare state.

That last proviso is an important one. As Ed seeks to convey a clear message on what the Labour Party stands for and what policies it would implement, he has to be careful not to abandon the values and language of democratic socialism. He was right to state that “my Labour Party is not going to bow to the outdated idea that says that government cannot help”, and as the Left rallies for a new campaign against the misguided policies of the Coalition,  many look forward to hearing more about what a Miliband government would do to bolster the state’s ability to create a more progressive society.

Louie Woodall is Assistant Editor of the Young Fabians Blog

The Promise of Britain? Gauging support for Labour’s Education policy

If the issue is worth talking about, then people will come. At least this proved to be the case for the Young Fabians’ breakfast fringe meeting during Labour Party Conference. The 8am start a couple of days into conference didn’t prevent young people attending in force to discuss the multitude of issues faced by the squeezed youth.

Taking the title of the Young Fabian Policy Commission ‘Securing the future of the next generation’, and looking across a range of short and long term policy areas, the fringe sought to address how Ed Miliband’s Promise of Britain could be realised.

I chaired a panel featuring Joani Reid, Young Fabian member and chair of the aforementioned policy commission, Andy Slaughter, MP for Hammersmith and Shadow Justice Minister, John Woodcock, MP for Barrow & Furness and Shadow Transport Minister, Rosie Cooper from Catch 22, and Fatima Hassan, from our partners ICAEW.

Amongst the themes that emerged from panel and audience discussion were: the need to replace what is looking like a process of managing decline with a positive agenda characterised by hope; an optimism in young people and for young people; the desire to reduce the gaps between young people and the world of work, particularly be exploiting opportunities for collaboration; utilising models for involving young people in strategic decision-making; acknowledging the importance of local government where many services are accessed; and that more of the same is simply not going to cut it – Labour needs to start early in formulating new policy that it can implement as a government after the general election.

And there was also plenty of opposition to the new Labour position on university fees, with puzzled voices unsure why the leadership had nailed its colours to the mast of £6,000 fees, a sum not inconsiderable to most young people and their families.  I don’t have the answer to that one, it seemed somewhat arbitrary to me – though the problem initiated years ago when Labour in government abandoned the principle of education free to the user. It was inevitable then that the argument just becomes about numbers. A shame.

What the policy has in its favour is its simplicity. And answers that are easy to understand and easy for politicians to explain have the potential to serve the party well. But they are not always right, and not always enough. The Young Fabian fringe demonstrated that the problems themselves that young people face are many and complex – but there is a lot of appetite to resolve them.

I look forward to seeing the final outcomes from Joani’s Young Fabian policy commissions – watch this space over the next few weeks.

Adrian Prandle is Chair of the Young Fabians

Conference – a view from outside Liverpool

The 2011 Party Conference season is giving me déjà vu.

Watching Labour from outside Liverpool, through the prism of media, blog and twitter coverage – to be fair – there was a lot to be happy about.

Keynote speeches received a lot of airtime and the key message punched through, particularly Balls on fiscal discipline (which coincided nicely with the Fabian publication “The Credibility Deficit”), Cooper on police bravery and reform, and Ed Miliband on ‘I’m my own man’.

The fight against the (perception at least) of a lurch to the left is going well. Ed M is speaking more passionately and more confidently. I believe he’s having speech training. That was a good idea, which is paying off. Ken also made some noise, that punched through to national media, on transport fares. And he dovetailed nicely with a simultaneous SMS campaign.

Ed’s main message, around ethics in markets and not-business as usual, needs a bit more work to stick in the minds of the man on the Clapham omnibus. But I think it could resonate well. I’d caution though, that just “being against business as usual” only works when you explain quite a bit of context.

On the down side, there were a lot of blogs and tweets pointing to the party being in lemming mode. There is a body of opinion that is frustrated by a sense that we know we have an unelectable leader and we are not landing the blows against the coalition, but that we are happy to stick our heads in the sand and keep congratulating ourselves. From outside of Liverpool, I picked up quite a bit of this sentiment.

But what do I mean by déjà vu?

It was the summer and autumn of 2008 when the credit crunch turbulence escalated into a full-blown financial and economic crisis. It came to a head around the time of the Party Conference season. In 2011, the Labour leadership speeches were ok. There were no big fails. But the Labour conference seemed slightly blind to the fact that the global economy is standing on a knife edge, in a similar position to where we were in the Autumn of 2008. Failure to reach a solution to the eurocrisis will affect all our lives in a very bad way for a long time to come. It will be a source of economic malaise and deprivation and, who knows, potentially a source of conflict.

In 2008, Cameron – in opposition – grasped the severity of the 2008 financial crisis and ripped up all the main speeches (and conference agenda) and refocused on what was happening in the economy. That showed a bit of vision.

Unfortunately, Labour didn’t do the same in 2011. Perhaps our heads are a little too far in the sand.

Nick Maxwell is Partnerships Officer for the Young Fabians.

Inside conference

Liverpool is lovely. The Labour Party should be planning another conference in Liverpool again, very soon. Everywhere people have been talking more about how welcoming, friendly and revitalising the city has been. It has even provided ample opportunities for delegates and members to escape politics for a little cultural respite.

That’s not to say that the mood amongst the crowd isn’t febrile. We’re only half way through this year’s conference but it is clear that people are chomping the bit to discuss and debate the issues. This afternoon’s speech from Ed Miliband therefore has a high conference threshold to reach.

The pre-briefing points to a leader’s speech of big themes and populist rhetoric, which should play fairly well to the TV masses. But Miliband will no doubt find a more challenging audience in the conference hall.

Just take the debate at this morning’s Young Fabian fringe. Politicians should not discount the appetite for discussing our “squeezed youth” agenda and the challenges facing the next generation, it is obviously huge when an 8am fringe leads to an almost full room.

And, importantly, people are not content with just listening, they want proper dialogue.

I’m not sure what Andy Slaughter or John Woodcock were expecting but they were soon faced with a full on and vibrant debate covering the full gamut of issues our Next Generation policy development group has been looking at.

What is clear is that Labour’s policy development process needs to be geared towards continual engagement with people on these issues, consciously reassessing whether their thinking answers the concerns and hopes of the people we hope policies will affect. As John Woodcock put it, moving beyond “cut and paste policy”.

Maybe that’s not where the leadership is just now but there’s a feeling they need to show they are on that journey. Despite the need for the big picture, which Miliband’s senior advisor Lord Wood made a cogent argument for at our Institute for Government event before conference, we know that the public also wants to be convinced that we can deliver. They also want to see a credible route for the high aspirations we are espousing. On everything – from our response to the Big Society, our ideas about mobilising communities and creating a living, breathing industrial base that can lead us to growth – people want to know how we might get there and what it will mean for them in practice.

That points to more incrementalist policies in some areas and more action from Labour-led local government.

Finally there is a sense that Government cannot do it all; while state-led policy is a necessity, the state needs to find its groove as a mobilising force for business, communities and ordinary people want to lead better lives for themselves and their families.

Vincenzo Rampulla is Officer without Portfolio for the Young Fabians.

Labour Party Conference predictions

This is the first “proper” conference since the Labour Party’s General Election defeat of 2010, given the 2010 conference was dedicated to the results of the Labour Leadership election, and the subsequent shock win of Ed Miliband.

Aside from the almost certain grumbles about the conference venue – no grand old conference hotel in the secure zone for politicians and the media to hobnob – this year’s conference is likely to be almost entirely dominated by conversations on the internal structures of the Labour Party itself.

The Refounding Labour process, spearheaded by Peter Hain, has proposed  various measures with the aim of reconnecting the Labour Party with the public, and making it more focused on community activism.

Firstly, the relatively needless process of having Conference rubber-stamp the change from an elected Shadow Cabinet to one which is solely nominated by the Leader, Ed Miliband. In truth this change should be a matter for the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) given it is simply a change in the standing orders. However, since it was the Refounding Labour process that proposed it, it will go onto the conference floor for discussion. As a result of this expect to hear lots of chatter about which of the current incumbents wags think will be for the chop – and of course the much-mooted (hoped-for?) return of the ‘Prince Over The Water’ figure, David Miliband.

Secondly, the far more interesting proposal to add a new section to the Affiliates section of the electoral voting college of the Labour Party. So alongside the Trades Unions and the Socialist Societies such as the Fabian Society and others, registered supporters of the Labour Party will be invited to vote for leaders in the future. One can only assume that Ed Miliband won’t be expecting this to be used for a long time yet…

Further changes in this respect include restricting members and others to a maximum of one vote in a maximum of two sections of the electoral college. One for psephological  wonks really. The Trades Unions reaction to this has been relatively muted – they are presumably relieved that this is a relatively minor adjustment to their power in the party structures.

On the policy front, Shadow Ministers will set out in their keynotes a broad-brush approach to their policy portfolios, giving little specific detail but setting out a direction of travel. After the plethora of policy reviews (some say in the high 20s, others have counted over 70), members will want to see that some hard thinking has been done on issues such as health and social security – and of course on economic growth.

Names to watch on the fringe? My money is on strong performances from John Woodcock MP, Stella Creasy MP and Kate Green MP. Encounters to look out for? Well, I wouldn’t like to be stuck in the lift should Ed Balls and Alistair Darling meet unexpectedly!

Steve Race is Equalities Officer for the Young Fabians.

Some questions for “Next Generation Labour”

Next Generation Labour launched today, founded by several former Compass Youth Committee members. I can’t speak for the rest of the Young Fabian Executive, but to my mind there is plenty of space on the left for a plurality of ideas, perspectives, and youth organisations.* To that extent, the launch should be welcomed.

But reading their founding statement, I was left with some questions which I think Next Generation Labour’s founders should take seriously.

The founding statement says:

“…for so many of our generation, Labour became a party of the establishment. It failed to ensure growth was shared fairly enough – whilst the very wealthiest got ever richer; it raised tuition fees, pursued war, attacked civil liberties and let immigration be demonised.

To win, Labour must be willing to articulate a modern left politics and reconnect with the coalition of supporters it lost and the vast majority opposed to the Tories’ reactionary agenda.”

I’m not sure I fully agree.

If the electorate were really concerned about the ‘problems’ of Labour in government – rich getting richer, rises in tuition fees, a government pursuing war, letting immigration be demonised – then why did the Tories win a majority of the votes, and the chance to form a Coalition government who have gone on to do exactly those things?

Will Labour win the next general election solely by appealing to those opposed to the Tories? This seems unlikely to me – any general election victory will have to be built on winning over some people who supported the Conservatives at the last election. Surely these form part of the “coalition of supporters [Labour] lost”, too?

Moreover, are there enough people opposed to the Conservatives who will vote for a change in government at the next election? How might Coalition politics affect that?

Isn’t being seen as the establishment inevitable if you become a party of government? Aren’t constraints the inevitable trade-off in return for the ability to effect change as a governing party?

Is this founding statement therefore just an opposition’s charter?

My main concern is that the genuine desire on the left to “articulate a modern left politics” – shared by more than just “Next Generation Labour”, incidentally – could be the exact opposite of “reconnecting with the coalition of supporters [Labour] lost”.

Yes, Labour needs principles on which to hang any policies it puts forward at the next election (and in the intervening period). But those principles need to recognise the cold electoral facts the party faces.

Hoping that principle alone carries Ed Miliband through the door at Number 10 in four years time is wishful thinking. Establishing a new vision for the left on ground unappealing the broader electorate will likely only result in failure, however noble that vision is to the left.

It’s probably a dangerous game to quote Tony Blair, but seeing as he is the only Labour leader to have won a general election in the last 30 years, I’ll take my chances. Blair once said: “Power without principle is barren, but principle without power is futile.”

That, in essence, sums up the challenge Next Generation Labour – and the rest of us – face in the coming months and years: balancing our core beliefs and principles against the shifting sands of public opinion.

Alex Baker is Secretary of the Young Fabians.

*Our own Caroline Alabi is part of the founding group of Next Generation Labour.

Westminster has a lot to learn from Michelle Obama

In her latest YF Women Perspective column, Young Fabian Membership Ambassador Anna Bage reflects on Michelle Obama’s visit to the UK.

During Barack Obama’s state visit to the UK last week, the focus was on Anglo-American relations and the furthering of the ‘special/essential relationship’ between America and the UK.

In the same week, Michelle Obama visited the University of Oxford, addressing the girls of the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School. Using her own background as a starting point, she outlined what she believed to be the key to accomplishment.

“Success,” she stated, “is not about the background you’re from…it’s about the confidence you have and the effort you’re willing to invest.”

In a motivating speech, Michelle outlined that regardless of background, experience or ability, having the confidence in your own ideas and striving for achievement was the way in which young women could progress, without limits, into whatever career paths they choose.

At the Fabian Women’s mentoring scheme on Monday 23 May, Ed Miliband took the same stance as the First Lady on the aspirations and opportunities for young women that the Labour party can endeavour to provide. Although it has a record on gender equality that surpasses that of both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, he argued, the Labour party still has a long way to go in promoting equality and fairness for its female members.

Much like Michelle Obama, Miliband recognised the potential of success that young women could make the most of, if given the support and confidence.

It is not only this, though, that would improve the way in which the political machine of Westminster operated. It seems evident that with more women in politics, ideas would evolve differently, with varying outcomes driven by diverse reasoning.

As Catherine Macleod, former Special Advisor to Alasdair Darling, said at the same event: not only do women have to work harder than men in the political sphere to get what they want, but they have to work harder in creating opportunities for themselves as well.

When Michelle Obama told the young women of the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School that they could work hard and achieve whatever they wanted, wherever they were from, she played upon her own background as an example of hard graft overcoming a disadvantaged start in life. She reminded them that neither of her parents had attended University, and that she herself grew up in a poor and underprivileged part of Chicago.

It’s clearly important to improve diversity in Westminster by increasing the number of women. What’s equally important though, and what Michelle Obama highlighted in Oxford and Ed Miliband at the Fabian Women’s Mentoring Scheme, is that Westminster needs to become a better representation of society as a whole.

The Obama, ‘whatever your background’ motif, doesn’t yet ring true of Westminster: as well as being unrepresentative of gender, it fails to deliver on providing a variety of people from different social backgrounds. Providing opportunities for women outside of the Westminster bubble is essential. Those who have taken a less traditional route in education, perhaps, or whose degree status doesn’t reflect an obvious interest in politics can surely only contribute to the diversification of the House of Commons.

This in turn could improve policy.

By actively encouraging such diversity, and by taking a lead from Michelle Obama’s motivating speech, the Labour Party could find itself providing a strong model which all those in the political arena should aspire to.

Introducing our 2011 Policy Commissions

The Young Fabians will soon be launching four Policy Commissions. Our Policy Commissions form the backbone of our policy work and since their inception they have increasingly become strong access points for our members into the policy making process of the Labour Party.

This year we launch the Commissions at a crucial time for Labour. With a thorough examination of party policy under the stewardship of Liam Byrne MP, there is a timely opportunity for our members to take a firm grasp of the chance to offer Labour our ideas on the party’s policy renewal. The process we are undertaking will be a vehicle for our members to develop their ideas and test their suggestions which we will offer into Liam’s Fresh Ideas policy review.

Over the coming months, four Young Fabian members will lead informed debates and discussions, open to all Labour supporters which will result in our submission to Labour’s Policy Review and a Young Fabian Pamphlet setting out our ideas for Labour’s future policy offer.

Our four commissions will look at:

1. Renewing and Reforming Our Economy – Maneesh Sharma and Graeme Henderson

The task of this group will be to investigate the path Labour should take to build a more sustainably prosperous economic settlement for Britain. It will investigate the need for an active industrial strategy, the fairness divide in our economy, job creation and productivity. It also will look towards opportunities in the green economy and in new and emerging markets as well as looking to incentives for business to break out of the ‘low pay low skill’ cycle.

2. Building Stronger Communities - Richard Angell and Anas Sarwar MP

This group will look at the strength and resilience of British community life in the modern world. It will investigate how families across the country are working harder for longer for less. The consequence of this for family life and community activism will be explored. It will also look at the challenge of how communities are empowered into the political process so that citizens become stakeholders in their communities and in national life.

3. Securing the Future of the Next Generation – Joani Reid

Ed Miliband has stated that “the British Promise, that the next generation would always do better than the last, is now under threat like never before.” The key challenge of this Commission will be to investigate how young Britain is coping with the consequences of government fiscal retrenchment. Facing debt, a difficult labour market and a challenging housing market, the next generation of Britain is under huge pressure. This commission will look at how Labour should respond to the challenges facing the next generation.

4. Labour and the World – Debbie Moss

Foreign affairs is at transformative moment and this group will explore Labour’s role in the World. It will span aid policy in a time of austerity, to security in the context of defence cuts and the criteria for military intervention in fragile states and the balance between domestic security and external stability. Labour in the World will look at Britain’s relationships to other states and institutions and how we form an ethical foreign policy and learn lessons from past conflicts.

Young Fabian members have much to offer these four big policy areas.

Please sign up to join our Policy Commissions and join in the debate about Labour’s future policy offer.

Together we look forward to offering the Labour Party a series of new, fresh and robust ideas.

Brian Duggan is Young Fabian Policy Officer.

The key to Labour renewal? Reflect, campaign and listen

Ahead of the Fabian Society Progressive Fightback conference tomorrow, Young Fabian Membership Ambassador, Martin Edobor offers his view on how Labour party reform.

At the last General Election we failed to convince the electorate that the Labour party was the right choice for Britain. Cameron was unable to form a majority and through compromise a coalition government was born. From the ashes of defeat we elected a new leader and began rebuilding.

A year on, despite Ed Miliband’s steady stewardship, the direction we should take as a party still remains unclear.  At the next General Election, if we are to win, we must be able to communicate to the country our vision of Britain. In order to do this I believe Labour must reflect, campaign and listen.

Reflection must begin by looking inwards at our party’s organisation and structure and outwards to the changing world around us. The recent Scottish parliament election has shown that there are still deep rooted problems with our party’s organisation.  We must no longer take for granted our core votes, but provide a convincing argument for both our supporters and those who remain sceptical. The recent review of Scottish labour ordered by Ed Milliband is a step forward; however we must go further if we are to avoid a repeat of the Scottish elections. Peter Hain’s review is to be welcomed, but we must ensure that it yields tangible improvement.

In the process of renewal we must still remain a campaigning force. With the coalition cuts, Labour must continue acting as a voice for the people. This can be done if we continue highlighting the coalition’s shortfalls and also campaigning on the ground for public services.

Finally, Labour must begin a process of listening. In order to address the concerns of the electorate we must first understand their problems. Understanding can only be achieved if we take time to hear what people have to say. Labour has begun listening, and we must continue doing so if we are to truly reform as a party.

The Progressive fightback? Start by abandoning the word ‘progressive’

This weekend, the great and the good of the centre-left will converge on London to perform a post-mortem on elections and of Labour’s year in Opposition. Huzzah! It’s Fabian Society Conference time.

Sadly I won’t be there. It’s my birthday this weekend, so I can think of a gazillion better things to do on Saturday than debate Labour Party strategy.

And I suspect it won’t really matter not being there. It’s highly likely that some or all of the following will be discussed as reasons for a rather limp twelve months for the left: length and timing of leadership election; strength of opposition narrative; focus on Lib Dems rather than Tories; complacency; Ed Miliband failing to find his voice quickly enough; trust on economic issues; lack of policies; Murdoch press etc etc.

So, for what it’s worth, here is my two-penneth on how to mount a ‘Progressive fightback’: start by abandoning words like ‘progressive’. Bin them. No seriously. ‘Progressive’ is meaningless. It’s bunkum. And, more importantly, using it as a badge of honour isn’t going to win votes.

Time was when to be a progressive meant something. In the 90s they were the sparkly New Labour types. Trendy. Cool. Progressives fought against the loony left whose wet dream was for complete nationalisation of all industry. And against those on the right who lamented the collapse of the Empire. And against those beardy weirdies in the Liberals who couldn’t make their mind up on anything.

Progressives even had their own colour: purple. What colour are you? Blood red? Too Soviet! Puke yellow? No thank you! Royal blue? Off with your head! They’re not progressive. Purple is progressive.

Voters could spot progressives. And they liked them.

But in Coalition Britain, we’re all progressive now. David Cameron is a ‘progressive Conservative’. Nick Clegg is a ‘new-fashioned progressive’. And the left is working out how to mount a ‘progressive fightback’.

I guess you’d know if you’re not progressive. Non-progressives are the sort who would make people sell a kidney just to be able to afford kidney treatment. Or the sort who would euthanase immigrants to keep their numbers down. Or the sort who would reintroduce tongue clamps for women. They’re not progressive.

Not you? Then well done! You’re progressive! Bravo.

Except the term, by being appropriated by parties across the political spectrum, has become devoid of any meaning. It is a huge canvas onto which you can project almost any ideal.

But there are other problems with the term too.

Take the AV referendum as an example. As Jessica Asato, Director of Labour Yes to AV, has now admitted, the Yes to AV campaign should have had the slogan “a small change that will make a small difference”. Yet the more fervent supporters of AV whipped themselves into an orgasmic frenzy, arguing that those who didn’t see the point of AV (68% of those who voted, as it turned out) were heathens opposed to the betterment of society. AV was change. It was progress. If you opposed AV then you weren’t progressive. You were conservative. Or stupid. Or Rupert Murdoch. Or a stupid conservative Rupert Murdoch.

So terms like progressive alter the terms of the debate in an unhelpful way. Opposing specific forms of change doesn’t mean you don’t share ideals, necessarily. It might just mean you disagree about means. Labels like progressive put an impetus on those who describe themselves thus to constantly agitate for change. But change for its own sake is pointless.

And for voters terms like ‘progressive’ have probably always been meaningless. But now they look increasingly patronising too. It’s the sort of term that might have resonance in a small band of intellectual and political elite – the denizens of the People’s Republic of Islington – but it in no way meaningfully relates to what punters on the doorstep give a crap about. Like paying the bills, or what’s best for the kids, or how annoying the neighbours are.

In short, it’s not a term that will help Ed Miliband look and sound like a fully paid-up member of the human race. And based on the last few months, that is looking like an uphill challenge.

To be ‘progressive’ is now completely, utterly, totally devoid of meaning. It is to be anything and everything, and absolutely nothing all at the same time.

So my suggestion is to jettison it. To use simple language that has real meaning to the sorts of voters Labour needs to win back. Maybe then they might be more willing to get involved with the Party and its work.

Or, at the very least, to vote for it in future elections.

Alex Baker is Secretary of the Young Fabians.