Hazel Blears: Refusing to fade away into obscurity

Olly Deed interviews Hazel Blears

The Labour Party backbenches are littered with a retinue of former cabinet ministers from the Blair and Brown governments. Etched on their faces are lines and creases that tell a thousand stories. The last thirteen years in government were tough, but falling from grace is even tougher.

Some have made the transition well. Others haven’t. Ex-cabinet ministers like Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown have been rather quiet since May 2010, possibly contemplating life after parliament, having spent the last 13 exhausting years holding down high offices of state.

Others like Ben Bradshaw (who now finds himself heading up the Labour Yes to AV campaign), Bob Ainsworth (now on the Foreign Affairs Select Committee) and Jack Straw have cultivated worthwhile backbench careers using their considerable experience in government to scrutinise the coalition government policy.

My interviewee very much finds herself in that latter group. Hazel Blears spent much of the last 13 years in government. She started her life in government in 1997 as PPS to the then health secretary, Alan Milburn and ended it acrimoniously in June 2009 when she resigned as secretary of state for communities and local government before the local and European elections. She was comfortably re-elected as the MP for Salford and Eccles in 2010.

What makes Hazel Blears interesting is that she hasn’t just faded away into political obscurity like many of her colleagues. Arguably she has blossomed since her resignation, which has given her the time to think, listen, learn and engage in a number of different political projects. One such area that Blears has delved into, is the “Big Society”.

Whilst many in the Labour Party have simply dismissed the term as privatisation by the back door or a political cover for cuts, Blears has articulated a more thoughtful analysis of the “Big Society”, that it might be worth Ed and co listening to.

The immediate instinct when interviewing someone about the Big Society is to ask them to define it. So that’s where I start:

“As a political construct created by David Cameron in order to detoxify the Tory Party it’s the cleverest concept I’ve seen in a while … it says to his right wing that if you have a big society you can have small state … and to his left wing liberals it says that there is such a thing as society. I do think it’s about branding, it’s about repositioning and I do not believe it is about genuinely empowering the public”.

At this point I start to worry. Blears seems to be trotting out the party line on the issue. It’s the sort of answer that gets a standing ovation at a Labour Party meeting but doesn’t point towards any meaningful attempt to understand the “Big Society”. You know what I mean. It’s the whole “Cameron is a PR con artist” routine.

When we start talking about Labour’s response to the Big Society though a more thoughtful and constructive analysis emerges; the sort of analysis the party has been crying out for since the words “Big Society” were first uttered by David Cameron. So does Labour have the right narrative on the Big Society?

“It’s partly right, but it doesn’t go far enough yet and we need to work on that. I don’t believe it is just a cover for cuts, although it is partly that…you have a concept that most people in this country probably do believe in, that you put something back if you can, that you do want to have more of a say in your public services, you want to have more accountability. Those underlying principles are probably shared by 99% of the general public…so I think we need to work out this analysis of actually what is underneath this Big Society”.

Brave things for a Labour politician to say, but then Blears could never be accused of timidity. She says that cuts to the voluntary sector and community groups have damaged those principles that underpin the concept. As Blears sees it, the government have ‘miserably failed’ the test on the “Big Society”, which she defines as the three fs; ‘funding, framework and fairness’. It’s a sort of pithy analysis that Ed and his advisers might do well to listen to and mould for future debate.

So if the notion of the Big Society partly reflects the principles of ‘reciprocity, democracy and accountability’ but is damaged because of its connection to cuts, is there value in saving this term, repackaging and remodelling it and formulating Labour Party policy around it? Blears seems unconvinced.

“Because I think it is a Tory brand, I don’t think that we should be reinforcing that at all… people’s day to day lives are tough at the moment and although they support the principles, the Big Society words are a bit hollow now…but there is a Labour frame to this which is much more about co-operatives, mutuals, maybe a new mutualism, new ethical business, I think we can set it in a new framework and call it community action, social action, I don’t think you should call it the Big Society”.

Blears is full of ideas although she is very careful to disassociate herself (and the party) from the phraseology of David Cameron. Phrases like ‘new mutualism’ and ‘new ethical business’ will never be as catchy as the “Big Society”, but they point to a substance that perhaps Cameron lacks. Where they might lead to in the future is anyone’s guess, but with the party engaged in a policy review, if Blears were to develop the concepts of a “new mutualism” or “new ethical business”, it could form a framework for Labour’s future economic policy.

A criticism often made of politicians is that they can provide a useful diagnosis of a problem, but provide no remedy to cure it. Not Blears. She has been rather busy in parliament and one of the projects she has been engaged in is the Parliamentary Labour Party’s “Social Action Forum – designed to unpack the Big Society and re-engage Labour in a more communitarian style of politics. Interestingly, Blears, the chair of the Social Action Forum (and considered to be on the Blairite wing of the party), is joined by Compassite backbencher Jon Cruddas and one of the stars of the 2010 intake, Stella Creasy.

Since May the group have had three meetings (including one with Cllr Steve Reed, leader of Lambeth council, Britain’s first “Co-operative Council”) and they’ve had polling completed on the “Big Society” to tease out of the public what bits they do and don’t like. They’re also looking to publish examples of Labour in local government embodying the values of mutualism and co-operation in an attempt to use tangible achievements to re-capture the Big Society agenda.

The Social Action Forum will also be trying to work with business over the coming months as, in Blears’s words “business are beginning to get the message that just an old fashioned kind of capitalism where you simply try to maximise profits is not necessarily going to be the one that’s successful in the coming world and that where you are increasingly depending on human beings and knowledge for your growth, you actually have to treat your human beings quite well”. Blears and her colleagues are looking to work with ‘progressive’ businesses to work out what the new, socially ethical model of capitalism may look like, which sounds intriguing to the wonk in me, but perhaps won’t resonate so readily with the public.

Another project Blears has been engaged in since May is the Speaker’s Parliamentary Placements, which starting this autumn will place 10 to 12 interns – paid a living wage – into MP’s offices, giving individuals from deprived backgrounds the opportunity to experience life in parliament. The scheme has gained the support of the speaker and from politicians from all sides of the political divide.

Blears’s rationale for this is quite clear. “I’ve always thought that the political class, in all our parties, comes from too narrow a background and that’s been increasingly the case in recent years”. It is hard to dispute this when our Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the opposition come from relatively privileged backgrounds and have barely any experience outside of politics between them. There is even an element of the “Big Society” in this project, as Blears has been looking for private funding for the scheme. Rumour has it wealthy senior cabinet ministers have pledged financial support.

It’s quite clear that Hazel Blears has adapted well to life on the backbenches. Her enthusiasm for politics has not been dampened by the abrupt end to her cabinet career. She has ideas, gets things done and will be a constant thorn in the side of David Cameron in the years to come.

Before I leave, I ask Blears whether she has any intention of returning to the frontbench. Her response is coy:

“I’ve just taken the decision to do the things I can make a difference now, whether it’s the Social Action Forum or the interns programme, I’m sitting on the intelligence committee, which takes up a lot of my time … I’ve got lots to keep me busy.”

That’s not a no. Watch this space.