Future of Finance Perspective: Why we must never allow Westminster to turn into Washington

In her first column for the Young Fabian Blog, Young Fabian Future of Finance Network member Gillian Econopouly writes about the the US debt ceiling crisis and argues that British politics needs to avoid the toxic political discourse which has enveloped US politics.

This weekend, America woke up to the news that its seemingly infallible triple-A credit rating had been downgraded, as ratings agency Standard & Poors’ made good on warnings that wrangling over the US debt ceiling could have serious consequences for the country’s finances.

Whilst blame has been attributed to both parties, from both within and without, fascinated UK observers watched as moderate US Republicans struggled to bring the fulcrum of power within their party back to the centre ground and away from the now-infamous ‘Tea Party’ activists. This time, they seem to have failed in their efforts, even if the party won the day on the debt concessions.

Whilst Labour Party supporters (and let’’s be honest, many Conservatives and Liberals too) who hope to see a second Obama victory will welcome the electoral opportunity created by such internal division on the right, what has happened in the past weeks and months is actually incredibly damaging.

News reports have focused mainly on the embarrassment of the debacle to the US, as the country was chided by China for its irresponsible behaviour. This makes for excellent geo-political drama, to be sure, but the real cost as usual is to those already hit hard by the recession. Americans who have found their way back into work after the economic crisis will fear for the security of their jobs, whilst those still seeking paid work will continue to face an uphill battle. Even taking into account the cuts to public services in the UK, the social safety net for Americans remains much less developed, meaning poor parents will struggle to put food on the table and access health care for their children.

The Tea Party is not the only culprit in this saga, but it has a lot to answer for. The group ascribes to a political philosophy which is not only knee-jerk and divisive, but also seems to reject informed debate and instead rely on a folksy defiance against tax and government involvement without considering the relative merits of each issue. Critical analysis is rejected, and a values-based rhetoric about freedom and personal choice is being used to lure poorer Americans into basically voting against their own interests.

Whilst we have our own difficulties with fringe parties in the UK, we must never let what happened in Washington come to Westminster. Not just the downgrading of our credit rating (although that too would be damaging). But the lowering of political debate to a level so toxic and unproductive that we lose sight of the people who rely on policymakers from both parties to use intellect, information, judgment and yes, compromise, to make the decisions that the country needs.

In opposition, the Labour party has a responsibility to avoid the temptation of low-brow politics and instead focus on creating informed debate, undertaking considered critique, and putting forward real solutions and alternatives.

Our democracy demands it, and ultimately, voters will respect it.

You can find out more about the Young Fabian Future of Finance Network by clicking here.

Two pints of Fabiansim and a packet of crisps

It has been an interesting few months for the Fabian Society. Since Ed Miliband’s speech at New Year Conference and Maurice Glasman’s challenging contribution to the Young Fabian lunchtime session at the same event, Blue Labour has entered the Labour thinker’s lexicon for 2011, and often inaccurately set up Fabianism as its polar opposite. The debate continues over on Next Left today.

It was amusing then to see Labour’s leader use an old friend as a shield for questions about his plans for departure from bachelorhood – his stag party “won’t be two Fabian Society lectures and half a pint of beer”. Is Fabianism really the worst thing imaginable in the Westminster bubble and beyond?

If so, perhaps it is time to inject some dynamism into the society?

The second half of the year will see a new general secretary appointed to lead the organisation – and a great opportunity to show Ed Miliband why he needs an active and exciting Fabian Society. Naturally, there is plenty to build on: the leadership of the Fabians will be handed over with record levels of membership; a fantastic body of thinkers and doers in its youth wing (but as Chair of the Young Fabians I would say that wouldn’t I?); some tremendous local groups; and a history of significant interventions. Packed out events like this weekend’s Progressive Fightback conference (final few tickets here) show that the wider left wants the sort of discussion and debate that the Fabians facilitate. This is an organisation with a lot of potential for someone to take on.

So what’s the dynamism needed then?

The two things I took on board most strongly from the delegation I led to the Obama campaign in 2008 were the importance of people, and the holy grail of strategy. These principles make a good start.

The Fabian Society holds a unique position as both a think tank and membership organisation with democracy at its heart. The membership is a strength. The society can grow in size and influence by capitalising on its members talents. A small, hardworking staff with smaller than desired budgets could be supported by the people who sign up year after year and call themselves Fabians. These people are already contributing to the Fabian Women’s Network, numerous local societies, and of course the Young Fabians – but I’m sure even more members have even more to offer if empowered to contribute. Be it to greater policy debate as the critical friend of Labour, or having those difficult conversations the party steers clear of. Be it with abilities from their professional lives, as web designers, writers, industry experts, and fundraisers. Or be it liaising with local Labour parties and progressive campaigns. We should seek to grow the membership in numbers, but grow them also as individuals, developing their contribution to the movement.

The new leader of the Fabians will have new ideas. But they must bring the people on the journey with them. How? Tell them what you’re trying to achieve and facilitate their involvement in it. Get your strategy right, and stick to it. (David Plouffe’s The Audacity to Win is the key read here.) The Young Fabian executive committee has four strategic priorities (to increase membership, member involvement, funds and influence). This is public. The difficult decisions we make as a voluntary executive are taken through this gauge. And members are helping us – the Membership Ambassadors identified and supported by my colleague Anna-Joy Rickard, for example.

If the Fabian goal is to provide Ed with the ideas he needs to win a general election and improve the lives being damaged by this government’s actions, then a strategy in place to achieve that will be a crucial part of the new general secretary’s role. If the membership is contributing its maximum to this, I have every reason to think we can be successful.

If not, there’s always a night in with Ed and Justine …

• Submit your thoughts on the Future of the Fabians by clicking here.

Adrian Prandle is Chair of the Young Fabians.

Organising for success

Post-conference and with a new leader, Labour has a chance to start building. But it must seize the opportunity, bring together what has already been achieved and learn from choices made by others.

Back in 2008 when the Young Fabians came back from Ohio, having played our part in getting Barack Obama elected as President of the United States of America, our hopes were high that the same scale of political engagement we had seen in the US could be generated in the UK. Through outlets like the Young Fabians events, Progress-organised CLP meetings and on blogs like Labourlist, we actively sought to spread the word about what we had seen and what could be achieved.

Amidst uncertainty, Young Fabian success

Whilst we wait and see what arrangement emerges to govern the country, it’s worth reflecting on the impact of Young Fabians during (the first?) general election of 2010.

Over the short campaign, we led YF members to a series of campaign days – and we can see some excellent results and a 100% record:

In Walthamstow, after mid-campaign concern of a post-debate Clegg effect, Labour-Coop candidate Stella Creasy won with a swing in her favour.

Jeremy Corbyn held the safe seat of Islington North – I’ll report later on how the Young Fabian council candidates we supported that day in marginal wards got on.

Our driver for the Hope Not Hate day of action in east London, Jon Cruddas, saw off the threat of the BNP and Conservatives to be elected MP for Dagenham and Rainham.

In one of the worst results of the night for David Cameron’s Conservatives and Michael Ashcroft’s wallet, Karen Buck held on to her Westminster North seat from a much-flouted Cameroon despite difficult boundary changes.

Rushanara Ali took back Bethnal Green and Bow for Labour with a 5 figure majority that helped push Respect into third place.

And our final campaign day – in Harrow West – saw another Conservative disappointment and the return of Gareth Thomas.

Congratulations to all the candidates, and to all the Young Fabians who joined our campaign days over the last month or so for an immense amount of hard work and enthusiasm – it made a difference. Other good news comes from Airdrie and Shotts where Young Fabian executive committee member, Pamela Nash was elected, winning more votes than John Reid had in that seat in 2005 – well done Pamela! As the first ever current Young Fabian executive member to sit in parliament, we are sure Pamela will bring something special to her role of Parliamentary Officer. Elsewhere on our executive committee, in one of the last results to be announced, James Green put in a good showing in the Lib Dem-Tory marginal of Cheltenham – the seat saw a considerable swing to the Lib Dems, suggesting many of James’ supporters opted to vote tactically. And Rebecca Rennison, standing in South West Wiltshire did well to keep the Labour to Tory swing below the national average in this Conservative stronghold.

It’s particularly pleasing for me personally to see members of the Young Fabian delegation to Obama’s presidential campaign, which I organised, go from strength to strength. Both Pamela and James were there as were others who have stood for election and re-election to local government. No doubt they put to use some of the ideas and inspiration from Ohio in their own campaigns. I’m sure we’ll hear more from many of these people soon.

Congratulations again and thanks to all. It is beginning to look as though we will know quicker than I had expected how the new government will be formed. Let’s hope that the values we hold firm as Fabians are central to whatever programme emerges, and are carried forward by a Labour-led government.

UPDATE: I should have mentioned that ahead of each of the telephone debates we undertook telephone canvassing. For the first two debates this was to Tooting, and for the final event, Hammersmith. More success! Sadiq Khan and Andy Slaughter held off high profile Tory challengers.

UPDATE 2: News from Islington as promised. Congratulations to former Young Fabian chairs, Kate Groucutt (who finished top of the ballot in Mildmay ward where Joe Calouri was also elected for Labour) and Jessica Asato (who was elected as a councillor for St George’s ward) and commiserations to another former chair, Conor McGinn and friend of the Young Fabians, Alex Smith of LabourList, and his fellow candidate Gary Heather, who missed out in the two wards we visited last month. It was a good might in Islington though with Labour regaining control of the council with just shy of three quarters of the seats. And congratulations also to Mark Rusling, another former Young Fabian chair, who was elected to Waltham Forest council – it was Mark’s ward we campaigned in when we visited Walthamstow right at the start of the short campaign.

Respect, Empower, Include: Everyday people. Extraordinary results.

Stronger together. Big tent. Opportunity for all.

Three phrases we’ve all heard within the broad spectrum of the labour movement. If we are to take one thing from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, particularly noting where we stand politically right now, it is absolutely imperative that we start living and breathing such mantras in all we do as thinkers and campaigners on the left.

Unlike much of the Young Fabians’ excellent work over the years, the three publications we are presenting on our website today are not about policy. They are about people, relationships, our values, and the way we on the left organise and campaign. What the 80 members of the Young Fabian and Labour Staff Network delegation to Ohio last October/November saw was not a campaign impossible to emulate, nor one which formed on a radically different basis to any other successful campaign. But they did take part in an organisation that succeeded in spreading its best practice nationwide, which was coherent, attractive and approachable. It was a campaign that recognised the value of individuals and the strength of their collective endeavours. And it gave them a reason to take part in what Gordon Brown has called, people-powered politics.

Respect meant taking seriously the experiences, knowledge, skills and resources that were brought to the table by anyone and everyone. Include meant incorporating that offer when making decisions. And Empower meant the establishment of a structure that didn’t just assign tasks but allowed well-trained and supported volunteers to take real ownership.

In the neighbourhood in Columbus I campaigned in, the canvassing teams were run by volunteer Cecil Webster, a retired colonel from Texas. His military experience was recognised and utilised. And it made him perfect for this role: his skills of motivation kept canvassers plugging away to cover the patch; his sense of discipline ensured the tidiest campaign office you’ll ever see with everything in its place and no panic searches for GOTV sheets as volunteers line up waiting; his sense of humour helped people through the tougher times when they’d had a bad knock or were beginning to tire; and his self-styled ‘after action reports’ which allowed time and space for a proper group debrief, allowing volunteers to learn – semi-formally – from each other.

Internally and externally the campaign understood people and sought to build strong relationships. Relationships that it could then request something of. Alongside the mantra of Respect, Empower, Include, the campaign was frank in its assessment that ‘we build relationships because they are the only way to win’ and it didn’t seek to limit these relationships to its stalwarts. Everyone was not just welcome, but actively pursued to join the fold and trained in what they were doing.

Some Labour supporters will have been active in one seat all their lives; others will have campaigned in different areas of the country. Falling into the latter camp, I know there is some excellent campaigning going on in the Labour Party. But I also know, sadly, that (and not always without reason) the spread of our best campaigning ideas and methods is patchy.

The launch of three publications today will hopefully go some way to addressing this. They chronicle the experience of over 100 Young Fabian and Labour Staff Network members and others who took part in Obama’s campaign and offer ideas for Labour and union campaigns in the UK. From Ohio to Oxford Eastpresents the collective thoughts of the delegation and subsequent workshops and roundtables to offer practical suggestions for your campaigns. Lessons from the Obama campaign is a collection of individual articles written by grassroots participants from the UK. Lessons from the US union campaign for Obama brings together the methods of union campaigning in the US and presents a case for the Labour Party and trade unions to reassess the ways they work together in UK elections. No one is pretending that replication of Obama’s campaign is the golden egg we’ve been reaching out for. But these papers present some ideas that can make a difference.

What is exciting about the present is that it is the left in America who offer the ideas about organising campaigns for Labour to seize. The approach the Obama campaign took fits much better with the values of our movement than it does with our opponents.

We must consider how we interact with voters and each other, alter our attitude to trust, invest in people’s talents and develop them as individuals within our movement. In providing opportunity for all, within our big tent, we can be stronger together. As a party and as a nation.

Please click here for more information on the delegation and to download the publications. Let us know what you think – please comment below.

Adrian Prandle, International Officer, Young Fabian Executive

Additional event this week!

From Ohio to Oxford East
from 6pm, Thursday 30th April 2009
The Abbey pub, Westminster (1 Abbey Orchard Street, SW1P 2LU)

Following the hugely successful Young Fabian & Labour Staff Network delegation to Barack Obama’s campaign in Ohio last year, we are pleased to present three publications. These share the experience of the delegation and others who took part in the campaign, offering many ideas for your grassroots campaigning in the UK.

Please join members of the Young Fabians and Labour Staff Network for an informal drinks gathering at The Abbey pub on Thursday 30th April to mark Obama’s completion of 100 days in office and to discuss the publications.

Kindly RSVP if you intend to attend by emailing Adrian Prandle, International Officer, aprandle@youngfabians.org.uk. For more information on the delegation and to read the publications, please visit the Lessons from America page on the Young Fabian website.

Unions can mobilise to influence the issues the next election is fought over and its outcome

The union vote matters, more so than has been previously realised. 60% of union members in America said they voted for Obama. In the last general election in the UK, only 46% said they voted Labour. Where this was important in the US election where 12% of working people are union members, it is even more important in the UK where union density is more than double that, around 28%.

With a year to go before Gordon Brown must call a general election, these figures alone make a very strong case that of all the lessons the Obama campaign can teach the Labour Party, the most important might be to strengthen their work with the unions.

So what do unions, and the Labour Party in the UK have to learn from the Democrats and US unions?

I’ve worked with trade union officers from the UK and US, as well as Young Fabian colleagues, to put together a paper which I hope goes some way to answering that question.

To be published online here on Thursday 30th, the paper will follow the Wednesday night Young Fabians event: “Will there be a British Barack Obama?” and be part of our celebrations of Obama’s 100th day in office.

It will ask some tough questions of both the Labour Party and the unions, and encourage some of the changes that need to be made so we can work together as effectively as the Democrats and US unions did last year.

So before then, whether you’re a trade union or Labour Party activist, what do you think we can do to work better together in your local area?

Strengthening Labour – our politics are moral, our practices must be too

One of Barack Obama’s successes last year that isn’t actually discussed at every opportunity is the link between the man and the campaign. The creation of a campaign organisation in the image of its figurehead. Realising through his published writing, the strength in using someone’s real perspective and experience to make a political point, Obama’s campaign succeeded in part through making personal connections such as the sharing of personal stories and journeys between campaign colleagues, between staff and volunteers and between volunteers and voters (and crucially, vice versa). At every opportunity those involved with the campaign were encouraged to interact on a very personal level in order to be able to build relationships with voters. The mirror was also seen through a style of working. ‘No Drama Obama’ was the part-descriptor, part-mantra the campaign used to describe itself and its candidate and the characteristics of this – calm, considered, emotionless and not reactionary (to a degree), the lack of in-fighting and the lack of micro-management – could be seen right down to the neighbourhood organisers.

If this was in any doubt before the weekend, the Labour Party must build a way of working that reflects the morality, fairness and equality of our politics and values. And I mean this in the most thorough of senses: our politicians, in government or not, party staff or those working for politicians, our members, our democratic structures and openness to participation. For too long, many – but especially those in the Westminster bubble – have not admitted or not sought to answer the very evident conflict between maintaining power for power’s sake (be it for the party or for individuals) and doing the right thing, the things we joined the party, or stood for election, to do. As someone who used to work in the bubble, I do not absolve myself. This is no longer anything to do with the electoral cycle, it is simply essential for those things which the Labour Party and its affiliates like the Fabian Society and Young Fabians stand for remaining at the centre of political discourse, action and legislation. This is not about the right versus left of our party, not about pragmatism against values. It is not anti-big tent politics and is definitely not about failing to understand how the media works. It is not about individual personalities. Rather it is about all of us taking responsibility as individuals and within our groups, communities, offices, societies and CLPs, to ensure that the content of what we believe and what we want to do for Britain (and the world) is heard. And empathised with. And trusted.

We can, must, still communicate through the traditional media. We should use new media in innovative ways to engage our supporters and the wider public. We should be realistic that not all policies can please all people at all times. But we must be honest that we want the best for as many people as possible. And we must be honest in how we seek to achieve this.

The slippery slope that Derek Draper/LabourList (for it is unclear how to separate the two) were headed down, could be seen on the BBC’s Daily Politics last month when Andrew Neil failed to referee a horrible and petty argument between Draper and Paul Staines (the video is conveniently on the DP homepage as I write). In a comment on this blog, I argued:

Where I talk about the web being a new Westminster Village, in essence I mean the blogosphere. I think both LabourList and Guido are successful, worth a read, and important in different ways to different audiences. But the Derek Draper and Paul Staines ‘debate’ on today’s Daily Politics on the beeb demonstrates exactly what I mean. Despite the freedoms of the web, the political blogosphere is incredibly insular and dominated by a small number of people.
This may change over time. But right now, for me, it isn’t going to be the most important battleground for Labour to win the next election – or even mobilise support. Actually, it has a lot of potential to be as off-putting as many people find politicians’ speeches or party meetings.

Draper/LabourList had made the mistake of allowing itself to be sucked in to competing with Guido Fawkes instead of ConservativeHome. Perhaps implying this was Staines’ intentional strategy gives him too much credit but the outcome has clearly worked in favour of him and against the Labour movement. I believe Draper’s intentions were good and though Damian McBride’s differed, they were founded upon the quality of intense loyalty. The problem came in judgment. Firstly, that thinking the Guido model blog was in some way significant to Labour/Brown winning the election. Secondly, in misunderstanding that the vast majority of voters only know what is being said on Guido’s site (or prospectively RedRag) when the story becomes big enough, and for ‘big’, you can practically read ‘true’ enough, for the mainstream media to report it. We saw that this weekend. Thirdly, in believing that Guido Fawkes represents the Tory party and therefore Labour must have its own counterpart. An irritant on the other end of the political spectrum to us does not necessarily mean the Tories are ‘winning online’. The right is winning through sites like ConservativeHome because they are having debates, generating ideas, organising campaigns online, but also, and vitally, offline with voter contact. Labour can actually be very effective at this.

Being able to separate real world politics from village stuff is hugely important here and where the failure lied. But it’s a bigger problem that has been bubbling for years and that we must seek to address. In getting caught up over the latest big story we must not forget it comes on the back of a succession of stories on MP’s use of allowances that – objectively, whatever your view of the coverage and the rules in place – has been damaging to Labour. We must quickly separate what goes on and, to a certain extent, are deemed appropriate ways to behave and work in the Westminster village from what we actually stand for. And just as quickly, we must rebuild the former in the image of the latter.

Adrian Prandle, International Officer

Investing in people – a view from the Fabian book launch

When I started planning the Young Fabian and Labour Staff Network campaign trip to the US presidential election, I didn’t know who the candidate would be and certainly didn’t know the extent of the effect on political debate here in the UK. My inspiration came from my experience on campaigns in North Carolina and Georgia in 2004, the subsequent research I undertook following Labour’s victory in 2005 that looked at the similarity in tactics between that campaign and the Democrats’ efforts in 2004, and my desire to give other people the opportunity to see how things were done Stateside so as to bring back ideas to Labour campaigns across the UK.

The fetishization of Obama and his campaign typically leads to an emphasis on technology and online tools. Last night’s launch of the Fabian book, The Change We Need: What Britain can learn from Obama’s victory, was no different. The line-up of the panel led itself to discussion of old media and new media and how Labour must adapt its style and operations around modern communication channels. Important stuff. But it is very much a Westminster village argument – and as empowering as the web is, I don’t see signs yet that it is anything other than a new Westminster village: more diverse but still dominated by elites and failing to consistently reach and engage the wider British public. Such a focus misses some key aspects that we saw in Ohio that were strikingly different to how the Labour party organises its campaigns. In particular, how the Obama campaign utilised its greatest resource – people.

The discussion did move over a range of issues and the audience pressed the grassroots argument to the panel. Alastair Campbell said more than once that Obama ran a brilliant old-fashioned campaign as well as his modern campaign, but it’s hard to agree with Campbell’s assertion that Labour are probably still ok at the old-fashioned stuff. The Obama campaign, like previous Democratic campaigns, but unlike the majority of Labour’s, welcomed all-comers to its fold. It did not limit participation to membership, nor to number of branch meetings attended, nor quality of sub-clauses of motions proposed. But even more, it actively sought volunteers simply by asking. Each supporter we found on a doorstep was asked to volunteer and when they agreed, they signed up to a specific time on a specific date and received a follow-up phone call. Volunteers were valued. They were trained, debriefed, thanked, and empowered to contribute; their talents were utilised for common goals – like Cecil, the ex-Colonel, who ran our committee room with military precision (and disciplined cleanliness). Relationship-building between staff, volunteers and voters, was crucial and so training developed this. Everyone was trusted and seen as important and so campaigning strategy was shared. Empowerment, personal development, trust and solidarity. The strength of common endeavour. Isn’t this what the Labour party is all about? Yet such an approach is sporadic at best.

The research I undertook a few years ago concluded that incumbency was a significant factor where the 04-05 Democrat and Labour campaigns differed. We can’t let this be the case again, we can’t get caught up in thinking that because Obama was the challenger and Labour has 12-13 years of governing to defend that we can’t learn from his campaign. Other arguments against are that America is different (Ben Brandzel offers proof this isn’t the case), or that we don’t have the same financial resources. Frankly, that’s excuses. Not everything is different and if we don’t have the money then even more cause to take on board Obama’s organisation of free resources – the many people in Britain who believe they, their neighbours, and their strangers, will be better served by a Labour government. We can’t delay any longer.

Members of the Young Fabian and Labour Staff Network delegation, and others who attended December’s workshop, have fed their extensive experience of campaigning in both countries into a publication offering practical suggestions as to what local campaigners and organisers can do in their Labour campaigns. Look out for more information soon.

Adrian Prandle, International Officer

Is Brown the new Barack?

I missed the beginning because of work stuff – yes the Young Fabian Executive have day jobs too – but I thought our Prime Minister did very well just now in his address to Congress.

He came across as passionate, knowledgeable, a man with ideas about bringing us out of recession and preventing similar failures in our interdependent financial world in the future. And at times human. These are the characteristics that many Labour supporters have seen before at private or party events but which he has struggled to convey to the wider British public. It will be interesting to see which clips are shown on the TV tonight and whether the slightly pointless ovation count is played up.

On The Apology that most of the Cabinet were apparently advocating, he was absolutely right not to do it. Yes, because of the poster argument, but also because the key benefit of apologising would be to draw a line under the past and be able to focus on plans for now and for the future. But this would not have happened. The media – particularly the tabloids and Tory press – rather than say thank you, would have plagued Brown for apologising in America and he would have faced increased pressure to ‘tell us to our faces’. The Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues are beginning to find some more appropriate language about how we got here, and hopefully it isn’t too late, because acknowledgement (but not apology) is necessary. It is frankly ridiculous that the whole of the world’s financial trouble is being seen as something Brown should take the blame for and he is right to try and ride the clamour.

Despite the ups and downs of yesterday’s scheduling, a successful trip. But if he learns one thing from Obama, and the behaviour of the White House yesterday, it is that he can not just be the world statesman he’s playing to be, but must also be seen to be concentrating on Britain. The public here will want to know how global solutions to recession will keep them in work and keep the roof over their heads.

Look out soon for Young Fabian work and events - with international and domestic focuses – on what this means for young people.