To govern is to choose

There is one question that is guaranteed to be asked whenever anyone writes anything for publication. It usually goes something like: “Yes, that’s all very well, but why didn’t you write about [insert X issue the responder cares about]?” The X issue apparently being ignored may be on something related, or may be something the person responding feels should be given greater prominence than the issue under discussion in the piece.

It feels like this is a greater problem when you write about politics. So many people have such strong opinions and passions always run high. Single-issue campaigners feel aggrieved almost any time their priority is not the priority of others – whether that be an obscure mission or something that hits the headlines on a daily basis. However, this sense that it is harder in politics is probably me showing my own bias. I imagine that were I the editor of a website focusing on pet care, there would be passionate snake owners upset that I had not paid enough attention to the complexities of reptile care when talking about dog walking.

In the day-to-day editing of LabourList I make dozens of choices every day. What rises to the level of news? What can we prove rather than what do we just think we know? Is it a ‘LabourList’ story or just a story that people at LabourList find interesting (and how do we distinguish between the two)? How can we report on stories in a way that will illuminate the topic for you, our wonderful and knowledgeable readers?

READ MORE: Crisis? Which crisis?

On the comment side I accept or reject pitches on a range of topics for a range of reasons. How much have we already covered this topic? Does it cover a gap in our discussions? Do we already have a piece outlining a similar argument? What will be added with this piece? What balance will need to be struck if we publish something that pushes a particular viewpoint? Or is the piece actually saying anything at all? Do we need to reach out for an opposite viewpoint?

When writing we are limited by how many words people are willing to read and how much time (one of our scarcest resources) we have to dedicate to any one issue. Every piece of analysis we write could be stretched into a book. But I don’t think our readers would thank us if this email stretched to the length of a Game of Thrones novel every morning. So we have to make choices.

LabourList is small and specialist. Sometimes the latter makes these questions easier to answer. If it’s not about our party and wider movement, we don’t tend to cover it as news. But the former does make some of these questions harder and more painful. Thanks to our Friends, we have more capacity than we have previously – and are doing more with it. But there is always more we want to do. Your frustrations are often ours.

I was reminded of this when I was asked on the radio yesterday if concentrating on homelessness was the right thing for the government to do when the deficit is so high and the prisons crisis so acute. It was a frustrating question though one I absolutely recognised as legitimate.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

As I have written recently, the government faces crises on multiple fronts. Any time spent on one is time not spent on another. In the face of that it can often feel paralysing. To focus on one thing will inevitably bring criticism from those who do not feel this is the right thing. But as former French Prime Minister Pierre Mendès-France’s famous maxim has it, ‘to govern is to choose.’ And to succeed at anything you need to focus properly, with the right prioritisation and resources. That is not to say it will be the only thing the government will ever do – no government ever can or will realistically behave that way. But in setting out from day one a priority of ending street homelessness Burnham has made an early choice that it is absolutely right to follow through on.

No government will make choices that please everyone. But they have to make those choices or they will look, feel and be lost in a miasma of choices they fail to make. It will be in sticking to those decisions and demonstrating an ability to deliver on their clearly stated priorities that Burnham and Labour can show more widely that Labour can govern and govern well. 

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected].
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].