You are here: Home » Comment »

Labour needs to be more self-confident, and innovative, in the way we campaign

October 27, 2012 1:10 pm

Author:

Emily Roche

Tags:

Share this Article

The 2008 Obama campaign showed innovation in political campaigning that had never previously been seen, mobilising grassroots support via the internet. He reaped the reward of millions of volunteers and small-sum campaign donors, but Obama’s innovative campaign also set a precedent for innovative policy making – people saw that he could deliver a pioneering new project and believed he could do the same across public services. Labour continues to deliver tired leaflets through letterboxes and in doing so we miss an opportunity to show the electorate what we are capable of.

To capitalise on its polling lead, Labour should produce an ‘Obama style’ show of self-confidence and innovation in the run-up to 2015. Obama used interactive online tools, YouTube campaign videos and the broader internet to develop networks and raise money; in doing so he completely changed the way US politicians interact with voters, organise support and deliver advertising. The huge community that Obama mobilised subsequently shared more campaign material, generated more policy ideas and delivered more votes than any in US history. Yet an eye-catching campaign not only creates momentum and draws votes; it also stirs up excitement about what might be achievable by that party in government.

British political campaigns seem to shrink from modernisation – Labour clings to old-fashioned canvassing, emails that gripe about the Tories, and delivering leaflets that nobody reads. We’re at a time when party membership is declining, the populace is cynical, social media and internet usage are the very fabric of life and yet we have not revamped our approach to engaging with people. Labour ought to lead in bursting the bubble of predictability and testing out new ways of engaging with the public: build a striking online profile, deliver YouTube campaign videos, harness social networks, find new ways of using volunteers in communities, invite policy suggestions and campaign ideas online.

This approach should not stop with campaigning. While an innovative campaign should be the primary focus and could act as a platform for re-election, new approaches could also be used to garner forward-thinking policy ideas. One of the most exciting and innovative areas at the moment is social enterprise; organisations such as ‘Care4Care’ are creating new currencies that will cater for care for the elderly, others are finding ways to fill the growing gap in youth services. NESTA and Participle are testing out pioneering ideas for the delivery of public services when there’s no money left. Large private sector companies are investing in designing new public service models. Far from running scared of the private sector and social enterprise, Labour should focus on the ideas being generated in these spaces if it is realistic about winning in 2015. The party needs to work out how to implement left-wing policies whilst constraining spending. Using interactive approaches to harness the ideas of individuals, social enterprise and the private sector will not only engage the public, it will help the party answer some of its toughest policy questions.

Labour has the benefit of a polling lead at the moment, yet public opinion will continue to fluctuate and it will not be enough to wait, with fingers crossed, for the Tories to commit more follies. If Labour can lead with an innovative campaign, make the most of new ideas to transform its policy agenda and thus succeed in building an identity independent from the Coalition and our many complaints against it, then it can genuinely build both public trust and ‘Obama-style’ momentum.

AlanGiles

“British political campaigns seem to shrink from modernisation – Labour clings to old-fashioned canvassing, emails that gripe about the Tories,”

I grant you that is a bit silly – after all the ghatly James Purnell pushed through Tory Peer David Freud’s welfare reforms, and it is sometimes difficult to get a sheet of Bronco between the policies promoted by Right-wing Labourites and parts of the coalition.

BUT – however you deliver your message, be it in a printed leaflet, an illuminated scroll or the latest “social media”, you have to have a message to deliver that is worth publishing.

While Labour waits with baited breath for Crudas to step down from his blue skies after his leisurely policy review, it’s hardly worth wasting money to publish in any form the message “wait and see, but we are not quite so bad as the Tories”..

Also, don’t forget that some people do not use social media, and therefore the message whatever it is – will as likely be as ignored as the humble A5 leaflet through the front door.
- aracataca
  
  What and adopt the message put forward by you?
  - AlanGiles
    
    I see “Laurel” has given a ‘like’ to “Hardy’s” message. Well done, gents – Britain needs a new double act.
    
    All I can say Bill is that least any message I give is under my one and only real name – not under an alias, or by one of two others you have employed.
    
    It is true that younger people use social media (one minute they can be deep in political philosophy and the next the latest goings-on in Eastenders), but the young are less likely to vote – also of course a lot of older people – those who are historically more likely to vote do not use computers and even if they do, don’t breathlessly log on to Twitter or Facebook to see what some “Celebrity” thinks about the price of milk, so any political message, however profound, would be lost on them.
    
    And there isn’t a lot to say anyway until the end of the Great Policy Review – even recent LL articles have been very thin gruel indeed, all the way from cheap little shots at small parties all the way down to Milibands testes. That might amuse the likes of you and your little pal, but it will more than likely bore the hell out of uncommitted voters, who just see politics amongst the main parties as a non-cartoon version of Tom and Jerry.
    - aracataca
      
      So was that a yes or no?
      - AlanGiles
        
        What is there to say at the moment, William? Until the policy review reports, there is hardly anything to say or do. All that could be done would be to preach to the converted like you, who will swallow anything, provided it comes with a red rosette attached. There are also a limit to the number of times you can say “too far and too fast” or “for the many not the few” without it becoming stale and predictable.
        
        Most users of social media are more interested in “showbiz” tittle-tattle, and all sorts of ephemera. You need to reach out to a large audience of floating voters of all ages not just young people who might or might not get out to vote – you are more likely to engage the attention of an over 60 year old with a leaflet, or the person sitting on a bus who sees a poster on a hoarding, than you are with Facebook, and, on “Twitter”, as you are limited to 140 characters, Christ knows how “Progress-ites” would condense their windy rhetoric for the medium.
        
        I suppose now we must await your next “witty” but tedious remark, so that the would-be “Young Mayor for London” can ‘like’ it……
      - aracataca
        
        Disappointed you couldn’t answer my question.
      - AlanGiles
        
        There are times, when, despite myself, Bill, I feel genuinely sorry for you. You are so anxious to make mischief you like to appear as incredibly dense. I think I have answered the question twice now, just as I answered the one last week about the march. On that occassion I had to respond to your nonsense 4 times, but I have no intention of indulging you any further on this issue.
      - aracataca
        
        Genuine attempt to see if there was anything beyond the abuse, the fixation with Liam Byrne and James Purnell, the winding up of genuine Labour supporters, the condescension, etc. Doesn’t look like there is but there you go. Of course if you ever want to write something constructive or positive it’s an open site Alan.
- http://twitter.com/renieanjeh Renie Anjeh
  
  Oh yes, Alan because you have a plethora of experience in conducting massive election-winning campaigns (ahem). Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, Bebo, Tumblr – are used on a daily basis by millions across the world. How do you think Gangham Style became a big hit (if you even know what it is)? Black and White TV?
  David Freud was not a Tory peer when he was an DWP adviser. It was because he fell out with the Labour government, he joined the Tories and became a peer – and then a minister but then again how is your fanatical disdain for James Purnell relevant to Emily Roche’s interesting article?
  By the way, if you have studied philosophy you will know how what you call ‘blue sky thinking’ has effected the world that we live in. New ideas, new ways of thinking have literally revolutionised our world and our ideas for years. The same applies to politics, so instead of insulting Jon Cruddas (not Crudas), you might want to listen to his ideas and hear what he has to say because it could reshape Britain in the future.
  Clearly you don’t live in the ‘real world’, Alan, and you would do yourself justice if you stopped pretending otherwise.
- Bert Morgan
  
  “BUT – however you deliver your message, be it in a printed
  leaflet, an illuminated scroll or the latest “social media”, you have
  to have a message to deliver that is worth publishing.”
  
  Absolutely right, Alan. If I believed the bilge spouted by Roche in this article,
  I’d still be subscribing to the New Statesman!
  
  This is the whole problem with the Labour Party (still not
  having shed its Blairite past) – Because of the middle class profile of its
  leadership and MPs, and its reliance on middle class Compass group types for
  direction, the party shows no inclination to link with those currently suffering under the
  Condems. Rather, Labour’s finest, such as Ms Roche above, blame the ‘postal
  service’ for the failure to deliver a non-existent message to a middle-Britain
  who see Labour offer no direction.
  
  Miliband’s booing when he signalled further cuts under the
  Labour Party at last week’s rally, demonstrates less the need for better presentation
  by the party, but rather how out of touch he and the party’s middle class hierarchy is in not offering tangible alternatives to
  government cuts and condemning the aberrant behaviour of financiers.
  
  The navel-gazing and ruminating of a group of NW dinner party set is never going to disabuse a currently distressed electorate that the party is anything other than that which let down its natural supporters so badly over 13 years.
  And I’m afraid there are a lot of navel-gazers contributing to this website!
  - http://twitter.com/JamesDaviesII James Davies
    
    Bert, in your haste to dismiss the argument of the article as ‘bilge’ you have missed what I believe is one of the key points made. That is that connecting more closely with the electorate through mediums such as social media can be ‘ used to garner forward-thinking policy ideas’.
    
    I agree with Brumanuensis that social media connects only with a certain portion of the population, but given that twitter and the like are largely dominated by the young and left leaning surely a modern left leaning party would be idiotic to ignore the potential? It is not a coincidence that it was the Democrats and not the Republicans that harnessed the power of the internet more effectively back in 2008.
    
    Nor is it true that social media is the realm of the middle class. Given the fact that so many of the middle class politicians as well as accountants, teachers, bankers, lawyers… do not come into regular social contact with anyone from the working class on anything approaching an equal footing, the equal voice that social media gives to many should be welcomed.
    - Bert Morgan
      
      Ok, James! Wrong choice of word to describe the article as ‘bilge’. Of course there’s a role for all forms of social media in delivering Labour’s message.
      My point was, like Alan’s - Please make clear what Labour’s message is first!
      
      I hope you pick up on this rather belated reply – been off-line for a while – but as an adjunct to this discussion, Ed’s political maneuvering in voting with a bunch of rabid rightwing Tories for cuts in the EU budget (31st Oct) when the Labour Party is supposedly pro-EU was, as Cameron for once rightly said, ‘rank opportunism’ and ‘playing politics’, and a very good example, I believe, of Labour deserting its principles just in order to embarass the government!
      
      What better example does an interested electorate need of politicking coming before principle? I say ’interested’ because, as you will know, issues such as the EU do not loom large in the minds of the majority of the electorate - which is probably fortunate for Ed!
      
      However the example does serve to illustrate the primacy of political point-scoring over the interests of the electorate – and not a few Labour backbenchers were happy either.
      
      Kindest,
      
      Bert.
leslie48

Definitely correct way to go for young people who vote far less than others. They do not read newspapers or watch traditional TV channels like BBC or ITV or watch the news programmes and that’s the more educated ones too. But the are thoroughly engaged with new media. Go for it.

But it does not follow they will not hear the propaganda of the Daily Mail and Express which today is attacking in quite grotesque ways the ‘Welfare Mums’ and those on benefit who are taking from the working families. In a really ugly and viscous article by Heffer ( Mail online) he has pictures taken from ‘Shameless’ and he also has facts about the 120,000 underclass families which are being targeted . There is grotesque stereotyping going as he lumps together Shameless, dysfunctional families and people on benefits . He claims four million people were on out-of-work benefits under Labour and that this party created these people as their future voters. This stuff needs rebuttal.
Serbitar

In the American the general election 2008, Obama actually only got 53% of the vote.
- Brumanuensis
  
  In fairness, that’s not unusual:
  
  Obama 2008: 52.9%
  
  Bush 2004: 50.7%
  
  Bush 2000: 47.9% (less than Gore)
  
  Clinton 1996: 49.2%
  
  Clinton 1992: 43% (admittedly this was a three way race with Bush and Perot)
  
  Bush 1988: 53.4%
  
  Reagan 1984: 58.8%
  
  Reagan 1980: 50.7%
  
  Carter 1976: 50.1%
  
  Nixon 1972: 60.7%
  - Serbitar
    
    Only reminding everyone that Obama’s victory was by no means a landslide and that it’s unwise to over egg the pudding, electorally speaking, by over estimating the power of new media to deliver votes in a democracy.
Amber_Star

Labour continues to deliver tired leaflets through letterboxes and in doing so …we reach the people in Britain who actually vote.
Forlornehope

Unless and until Labour is willing to come clean with the electorate and explain that to have a decent society public spending is going to be higher than the coalition is planning and that will have to be paid for by higher taxes for a lot of people, it won’t be credible. If Labour is not in favour of public spending, what is the point of it?
Amber_Star

America thought it was time for a black, democratic president; that’s why they got behind the Obama campaign. Social media was one expression of that. He’d have won by a mile anyway.
- http://twitter.com/renieanjeh Renie Anjeh
  
  I have never heard such offensive and ludicrous tokenism in my entire life. People did not vote for Obama purely because he was black, they voted for him because he had the right vision for America and he was a better Presidential candidate than John McCain – and could not bare the idea of Sarah Palin becoming Vice President.
  Obama brought in new ways of campaigning which should be a model that Labour uses.
Brumanuensis

I think we need to be cautious about trying to emulate Obama circa 2008. The problem with using that election as a template, is that Obama generated interest regardless of his social media penetration. Social media is a useful device for dissemination, but my impression of it is that it doesn’t generate content, but recycles it. The most striking social media moments of this presidential election have come from stump speeches or old fashioned political glad-handing: ’47%’, ‘Romnesia’, ‘Horses and Bayonets’, ‘Check the transcript’, etc. Trying to use social media for generative purposes isn’t likely to yield much in the way of useful material. You’ll get a lot of calls for ‘no immigration’ and ‘bring back hanging’.

Equally, most people on social media are no more interested in politics than they are relative to their engagement with ‘old media’. People mainly use YouTube to look up music and so-called ‘viral videos’, or they have niche interests, which is where politics comes in, but if you want a wider audience, simply making more content available to people who already follow you closely isn’t an advance.

Now by all means use public feedback in policy making, but I honestly think focus groups and assemblies are a better way of doing it. People deliberating collectively are more likely to be mindful of others and less likely to simply nominate things that only they would take an interest in. Social media, paradoxically, act as distancing devices, because in the form of Facebook or Google+, they consist of putting on an appearance – hence the term ‘profile’ – which reflects the growing awareness that data shared on them are public. This is likely to make people more reticent about expressing their political views, not less. The caveat here is anonymity. I only comment on LabourList because I can do so anonymously and the Bar discourages social media use unless it’s for professional purposes. Maybe if privacy were guaranteed in these engagement exercises, people would become more willing to volunteer ideas.

In addition to my concern that you are overselling the usefulness of social media, I think you are unnecessarily deprecating canvassing. I agree leafleting is useless and I rarely bother to read Party e-mails, but canvassing is vital. You will never have a better opportunity to understand the psychology behind the views of members of the electorate, than through actually talking to them. I know canvassing follows a script, whether its over the phone or in person, but some of the most insightful political conversations I’ve had have been when talking to people on doorsteps. It’s certainly helped me understand the causes of popular anxiety about immigration, for instance. Given that most members of the public are disaffected with politics largely because they see politicians as remote and unaware of their day-to-day concerns, erecting another layer of separation into political activism seems incredibly unhelpful. You’ve also fully bought into the tired and damaging canard about declining membership requiring us to change our approach. We won’t get people interested in politics again, or be able to fully mobilise people at election time, unless we start rebuilding mass-membership Parties. If we want people to drift away into lives of atomised disillusionment, then by all means give up on membership drives. If you want people to start instinctively seeing themselves as being part of a wider community of interest, then start signing people up. It’s the sine qua non of political progress.
- Alexwilliamz
  
  Echo this. People will not be more engaged via social media, but content and purpose are the things that are missing in drawing people in. What the party needs to recognise the value of social media is its power to quickly organise events and campaigns amongst those already engaged. When there are specific campaigns then it is a very helpful organisational tool, but this is only when there is a clear purpose behind it, often something relatively simply. The problem when this comes to the party is too often the issues are not so clear cut or worse the party’s position is unclear or insufficiently different. The bigger challenge is turning social media interest into concrete action. There are many keyboard warriors out there who sound dedicated and up for the fight, but I’d be interested to know how many actually back this up with the actions in their life.
- Alexwilliamz
  
  Echo this. People will not be more engaged via social media, but content and purpose are the things that are missing in drawing people in. What the party needs to recognise the value of social media is its power to quickly organise events and campaigns amongst those already engaged. When there are specific campaigns then it is a very helpful organisational tool, but this is only when there is a clear purpose behind it, often something relatively simply. The problem when this comes to the party is too often the issues are not so clear cut or worse the party’s position is unclear or insufficiently different. The bigger challenge is turning social media interest into concrete action. There are many keyboard warriors out there who sound dedicated and up for the fight, but I’d be interested to know how many actually back this up with the actions in their life.
- Alexwilliamz
  
  Echo this. People will not be more engaged via social media, but content and purpose are the things that are missing in drawing people in. What the party needs to recognise the value of social media is its power to quickly organise events and campaigns amongst those already engaged. When there are specific campaigns then it is a very helpful organisational tool, but this is only when there is a clear purpose behind it, often something relatively simply. The problem when this comes to the party is too often the issues are not so clear cut or worse the party’s position is unclear or insufficiently different. The bigger challenge is turning social media interest into concrete action. There are many keyboard warriors out there who sound dedicated and up for the fight, but I’d be interested to know how many actually back this up with the actions in their life.
http://twitter.com/renieanjeh Renie Anjeh

I could not agree more with Emily Roche. An Obama-style campaign in 2015 would be excellent but to be honest, I think the leadership is already moving in that direction anyway. Ed Miliband has brought in Arnie Graf, was Obama’s community organiser, to help Labour get involved in community organising. Community organising was at the crux of the Obama campaign and the growing use of social media was branched on from that. The work that Movement for Change is doing, the fact shadow cabinet ministers have worked with Citizens UK, the legal loan shark campaign, Labour Students’ campaign on the Living Wage, Young Labour’s campaign on young homeless or the new Switch Together campaign – they are clear examples of how the party is moving into a modernised way of campaigning, but there is still a lot more to do.
I’d also go further and actually suggest primaries, especially in Mayoral elections and piloting them in key seats. Party membership is declining and tribal support for political parties is at its lowest ebb. Primaries are very good ways of engaging communities with parties and they pay off, as we have seen with Boris Johnson in 2008, Sarah Wollaston increasing the Tory share of the vote in Totnes, Dr Phillip Lee in Bracknell. Again, the party is moving in that direction judging by the new Labour Supporters network. Also, doorknocking is all well and good but Labour needs to start to reach out to new audiences and open itself up. One last suggestion, the Labour Party website needs to an online/social media strategist whose first task could be to improve the Labour Party website (and Alastair Campbell is the perfect man for such job).
TomFairfax

Sadly a problem for younsters with iPhones is that they forget that it’s rather a generational thing, and the people most likely to vote are somewhat older and think an Apple is something to be eaten. (And I say this as the possessor of one of the little electronic blighters. However, company financed and rubbish to use compared to my personal windows phone.)

By all means use social media as one of the tools in the box, but it isn’t a silver bullet and you still have to wear out some shoe leather.

Labour did well in places like Edgebaston and Barking and Dagenham, reversing national trends in 2010, because in both places, the local parties decided to get off their backsides and talk face to face with the people who were most ikely to vote Labour and encourage them not to stay at home waiting for Gordon Brownto fall flat on his face but vote for somene to represent them locally.

With any luck, Conversative Corby will see an increase in Labour support because people have been going out and canvassing.

The Obama lesson is that social media is a good way to get lots of small donations, that end up being a large sum. In the UK, the most effective opposition so far has been via 38degrees, who whilst on the internet are definately not a social media outfit, but a direct communication one.
leslie48

It needs to be re-stated – young people 18-30 – are massive users of new media and hardly ever consume the types of traditional media we oldies do. A Labour party unable to reach students through new media or social media is lost. It just amazes me any one can doubt this in 2012!
- Alexwilliamz
  
  No one is questioning the need to use social media and be better at using it to help get the message across, however this article goes way beyond that and tbh i was lost a bit about what was being said in the penultimate passage. I could not quite make the link between social media and working with other groups to solve problems, or rather why social media provides a specifically unique way to do this. I may have missed the point.
  As a veteran of being the ‘teckie’ one (I am not it is more a compared to others in the groups) in a group who I now refuse to get involved in setting up websites or other ‘interactive’ forums. The reason that unless you have some content that updates relatively quickly the whole thing is pointless and any initial interest ebbs away. We could be in danger by overemphasising this route of creating content, because we need content. Just as too much politics has become short term due to rolling news so too could policy as we constantly tried to change around the transient cyber world. Social media is a useful tool but overstating its value could be fatal, it is very tempting as it can be very easy to do and give the impression you are having a wider impact but this may not end up being reflected in reality.
Monkey_Bach

Obama had a lot of help from lurvely Amber Lee Ettinger aka Obama girl.

http://youtu.be/wKsoXHYICqU

Any chance of a Miliband girl?

Eeek.
Bert Morgan

I posted a comment earlier circa 2.45pm today) in relation to Emily Roche’s article.
I wonder if your website , in not displaying my contribution, is anxious not to allow criticism of any kind of contributing articles.
If this is the case, it is of little surprise that Labour makes little headway in attracting its electorate and that this website has such a paucity of those who would genuinely wish to see Labour back in power.

I expect to see this effort of mine deleted in line with your editorial policy.

Yours,

a socialist
markfergusonuk

Bert – your comment wasn’t posted because we have comment moderation for all new commenters here, and I have been ill this weekend so am only moderating them now…
- Bert Morgan
  
  Thank you for your prompt response, Mark. Hope you’re feeling better now.
Dave_Costa

Why do so many advocates of new forms of communication feel the need to rubbish doorstep and telephone voter i/d? It makes you sound like an elitist group who are thankful to have discovered a way of doing without party members. One-to-one conversation continues to be the most effective way of persuading people that we care about their views and their votes. We can argue about the starting point for those conversations – I personally still think that a voter i/d script is the best way of getting a sizeable number of our members out on the doorstep or making the calls, which is the necessary precondition for any conversation – but we can’t do without them.

My branch has signed up 96 registered supporters in a predominantly working class area of Cardiff – and only three of them have been able to give us an e-mail address. In our May council election we set up the virtuous cycle of listening as we did voter i/d and including surveys in our newsletters; publicising our policies to meet people’s concerns in our newsletters; hearing people on the doorstep tell us the arguments we had put to them in our newsletters. We used twitter, e-mail and a website too – but they were of minor importance compared with newsletters and direct voter contact.

I love the comfort blanket of the like-minded people I find on my twitter time line – but I don’t make the mistake of thinking that they are at all representative (try taking a look at what’s trending for a salutary reality check).

Across Britain there are millions of people who don’t use twitter or the internet and we should not write them off. And then there are millions of people across Britain who use these media to follow news about celebrities or sport – and will never go looking for political content. Yes we must use new media to ensure that we reach and are open to those who like to interact in that way – but most people will only notice our message if we knock their door, ring them on the phone or deliver a newsletter or direct mail.
Brumanuensis

Oppa!
Brumanuensis

Oppa!
Brumanuensis

Oppa!
Brumanuensis

Oppa!
AlanGiles

One day, Renie, when you leave the schoolroom and your twitter account behind you, you will have to join the real world – where I and many others have been since long before you were even thought of.

And – your condescending drivel notwithstanding Freud was already a Tory peer during 2009 when Purnell dragged his wretched reforms through parliament, but as you were only, what?, 13 at the time, perhaps your ignorance is understandable.

Try studying recent history instead of pretending to be such a smart little lad.
It must still rankle with you that you were not appointed Young Mayor of London when you were 14, so you have to indulge in this asinine toadying to right wing figures you seem to believe are the future.
AlanGiles

I see a “like” from William/aracataca. Good for you, it’s nice to see Hardy endorses Laurel. I suppose thats because Laurel did the same for Hardy the other day. Pity the music halls died out, you two would have been a scream.

Latest

News Unison Conference 2013
Unison set out their expectations for a Labour government

By Mark Ferguson

Unison General Secretary Dave Prentis set out his tests for continuing to support Labour this afternoon. Speaking at their conference in Liverpool, Prentis said: For too long we’ve built the careers of Labour politicians, only to be let down when we needed them most. I don’t want to hear Labour apologising for past mistakes, I want to see a clear agenda from Labour for the future. We must not support a Labour Government that does not : put an end [...]
Read more →
Featured Scotland
Why on earth shouldn’t Nigel Farage visit Scotland?

By Tom Harris

You’ve got to admire Nigel Farage. Like a comedian who’s already died on stage at the Glasgow Empire, he’s put on his “optimistic” hat and chosen to return to Scotland to campaign for UKIP. His last visit, you will recall, was memorable for his being forced to seek refuge in an Edinburgh pub from a mob of nationalists and trots shouting “SCUM!” at him as he tried to convey his message (a tad harsh, I thought. But I suppose “gentleman [...]
Read more →
Comment
Labour needs more than a few warm words on the environment, energy security and climate change

By Callum Smith

It seems that with the announcements of their intention to end universality in social security and accept the Coalition’s spending envelopes, Labour are gradually beginning to articulate what the Labour Party’s 2015 manifesto will look like. While much has been said on social security, general economic direction and housing shortages; there has been little said on the environment, energy security and climate change. Other than a few warm words from Mary Creagh MP in LabourList’s ‘One Nation Labour: Debating the Future’ [...]
Read more →
News
5,000 soldiers face redundancy – Media roundup: June 18th, 2013

Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this (and much more) in your inbox. You can sign up here. 5,000 soldiers face redundancy Thousands of members of the armed forces will receive redundancy letters tomorrow – as Government defence cuts continue to bite. Up to 5,300 serving soldiers in the Army will lose their jobs – including [...]
Read more →
News
Has David Cameron lost the plot?

Once upon a time David Cameron was known for his deft handling of the public mood. Not anymore. Last night, he tweeted: This is the menu for the #G8UK dinner. I’ll chair a discussion on tax, trade, transparency and Syria at 830 tonight pic.twitter.com/GAWDxvEDkI — David Cameron (@David_Cameron) June 17, 2013 This is a Prime Minister who is often lambasted as “out of touch”, at a time when half a million people are being driven to using Foodbanks because they [...]
Read more →

← previous next →

Signup to our daily email

Proudly sponsored by

LabourList Videos

Latest Posts

Labour needs to be more self-confident, and innovative, in the way we campaign

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

Latest

Unison set out their expectations for a Labour government

Why on earth shouldn’t Nigel Farage visit Scotland?

Labour needs more than a few warm words on the environment, energy security and climate change

5,000 soldiers face redundancy – Media roundup: June 18th, 2013

Has David Cameron lost the plot?

Email*
Forename
Surname