How the East was lost

By James Valentine

Activists from across the East of England attended a packed and enthusiastic meeting in the House of Commons on Monday evening. It was promoted by Bob Blizzard and Lewis Baston whose paper, published in January, gave its title to the event. Blizzard narrowly lost Waveney constituency in May 2010; one of many unexpected disappointments.

Along with panellists Richard Howitt and Kelvin Hopkins the meeting, chaired by Gavin Shuker, addressed the question of why Labour lost so badly in the East of England; going from 13 MPs to only two – Hopkins and Shuker in Luton.

Harriet Harman made a powerful speech exhorting activists to stand in the local elections and ensure that Labour is represented in every ward. Ed Balls, the East of England’s local election “Czar”, reminded the meeting about his upbringing in Norwich and continuing affection for the city. Strong Labour seats, he argued, are of no use unless we pick up marginals in areas like the East so we can deliver the next reforming Labour government.

There was a clear feeling of anticipation about May’s local elections, which will hopefully provide the springboard for Labour’s revival in the East. Although the East of England’s results were the worst of any English region the debate that followed was effectively about why we did so badly in the south of England in general as opposed to the North and London.

While Diamond and Radice’s report “Southerm Discomfort Again” used mainly focus groups, Baston and Blizzard concentrated on interviewing MPs and PPCs who actually fought the 2010 election. This gives a vivid picture of how the election turned out, with the candidates’ acute frustration and disappointment at times showing through.

The two most cited reasons that the interviewees gave for Labour’s loss was a feeling of unease about Gordon Browns leadership, and concerns about immigration. At the same time, the authors didn’t explain how these national factors affected the South more than the North. For example, the famous Gillian Duffy from Rochdale, was both angry about immigration and didn’t hit it off with Gordon, but then why did so many of her fellow northerners continue to support Labour?

Blizzard referred several times to the idea that if one could pick up a town in the East and plonk it down in the North, then it would turn Labour. It seems obvious to say this, but the question is, why? If you were brought up in the North, as I was, it’s to do with some intangible sense of community but it’s quite another matter to define this objectively or draw the political lessons.

The report is better, in my opinion, about how you manage periods of challenge. The authors referred repeatedly to the experience of the Tories in Scotland – that a political party can go beyond the point of no return.

The questioning of targeting is relevant here. All political parties target but Richard Howitt felt that that we have taken it too far. By neglecting less favourable areas in one election after another, we’ve gradually retreated into a tiny laager.

Several PPCs spoke at the meeting. Where targeting can go wrong is if you don’t provide the PPC in a less favourable area with the same moral support as one in a winnable seat. Clearly, the winnables should get the money. But I’ve sometimes heard PPCs being chided for working hard in Tory/Lib Dem areas – as if their efforts somehow detracted from their neighbours. This is a fallacy based on the idea that there is a fixed pool of supporters, whereas if there are inspirational local leaders, new activists always pop up.

The fact that it’s such a thankless task to be a PPC can also lead to poor quality applicants. These individuals may then say or do ill-advised things during campaigns and end up draining organisational resources from the winnables that they were supposed to be helping in the first place. Result; an unfortunate vicious circle that we must break now.