Labour needs to go bigger and bolder, not just to win but to govern too

There’s a letter in the Guardian today (posted below) which I, and a cross-section of “a coalition of thinktanks and party intellectuals” (the Guardian’s words not mine) have signed. The letter was drafted a few weeks ago, and I had no idea who else would be signing it, so it’s both interesting and impressive to see that so many people from so many traditions within the party and the wider movement have signed.

In some ways though Miliband has been unfortunate that this letter has come after a week in which Labour’s strategic direction has taken a knock. His reaction to the budget was lacklustre, and recent polls have shown a declining poll lead – but it would be wrong to see this letter as an attack on Miliband. Quite the opposite. It’s a call for him to listen to the better angels of his nature.

Last week I wrote that Labour was too calm – perhaps complacent – about the scale of the task ahead. Only a week later that seems a far more widely held view than I had imagined.  To see Compass, Progress, Class The Fabians, Policy Network and Nef signing the same letter is to see perhaps the broadest possible sweep of organisations within the Labour wonk-sphere united behind the same argument. Similarly, recent pieces by Tim Roache (also a signatory to the letter) and Rafael Behr in the New Statesman make similar arguments. It’s about giving power away. It’s about ending the hegemony of Westminster and the rule from Whitehall culture of our politics. And it’s also about making a much bigger offer to the electorate than has been made so far.

But what does that mean in real terms? How can you explain that in the pub or on the doorstep? Of course a letter signed by so many people (and by people with relatively divergent views) means there are different proposed solutions. My preference would be for a massive (million homes plus) house building programme run by local councils (using housing benefit to build houses not subsidise landlords, a national care service but one that’s devolved to local areas and communities and a rapid expansion of childcare to deal with the reality of a generation that can’t afford kids.

For me though, the key paragraph of the letter is this one:

“But if Labour plays the next election safe, hoping to win on the basis of Tory unpopularity, it will not have earned a mandate for such change. It must take into the election a vision of a much more equal and sustainable society and the support of a wider movement if these formidable challenges are to be met.”

As I wrote yesterday when talking about Labour’s polling angst:

“Such an agenda is there to be grasped by Miliband and co. A little boldness can go a long way – as we saw at last year’s conference when the energy price freeze threw the government into a state of confusion. But calmly creeping towards the election? Repeating old arguments rather than making new ones? Shrinking the offer? Refusing to take on the Tories over their budget for fear of upsetting anyone? That’s the kind of politics thats sees people become anxious. That’s the kind of politics that sees poll leads crumble.”

Labour needs to go bigger and bolder. Or as they say in Miliband’s office – go big or go home. Here’s the text of the letter:

Britain faces unprecedented challenges: a financial system still too big to fail or jail; austerity causing unnecessary hardship to those already at the bottom of a massively unequal society; climate change flooding people’s homes; and a democratic system that seems pretty irrelevant to any of these problems. To begin to tackle these challenges the country needs not just a change of government but a transformative change in direction.

That demands a Labour or Labour-led administration. But if Labour plays the next election safe, hoping to win on the basis of Tory unpopularity, it will not have earned a mandate for such change. It must take into the election a vision of a much more equal and sustainable society and the support of a wider movement if these formidable challenges are to be met.

As members of the progressive community that recognise the need for Labour to play a leading role after 2015 we would urge the party to adopt an approach to its manifesto that is based on the following principles: 

• Accountability of all powerful institutions, whether the state or market, to all stakeholders.
• Devolution of state institutions, by giving away power and resources to our nations, regions, cities, localities and, where possible, directly to the people.
• Prevention of the causes of our social, environmental, physical and mental health problems, which requires a holistic and long-term approach to governance.
• Co-production of public services by workers, users and citizens, to make them more responsive and efficient.
• Empowerment of everybody, so they are equipped with the resources (time, money, support) to enable them to play a full role as active citizens.

National government has a continuing strategic role to play but the days of politicians doing things “to people” are over. The era of building the capacity and platforms for people to “do things for themselves, together” is now upon us.

Working in this way, with others, Labour can help act to fundamentally disrupt power relations and reframe the debate to make a good society both feasible and desirable. It is time people had the power.

Neal Lawson Compass, Rob Philpot Progress, Patrick Diamond Policy Network, Anna Coote Nef, Andrew Harrop Fabian Society, David ClarkShifting Grounds, Mark Ferguson LabourList, Tim Roache Class, Maurice Glasman, Ruth Lister Compass, Robin Murray LSE, Anthony Barnett Opendemocracy, David Marquand Mansfield College, Oxford, Charles Secrett ACT! Alliance, Marcus Roberts Fabian Society, Cat Hobbs Director, We Own It, David Robinson Changing London, Colin Hines Convenor, Green New Deal Group, Professor Victor Anderson Global Sustainability Institute