by Atul Hatwal
In the seven months since the general election one of the few areas for genuine consensus within the party is a re-discovered desire to reach out and listen.
But if the party is serious about getting to the parts other big conversations have failed to reach, then the bandwagon is going to have to roll through a couple of tough neighbourhoods.
On one side of town, is a place, let’s call it, “white town”. Generations of white working class, big estates, low incomes, traditional Labour vote bank, rife with all the problems that decades of deprivation bring.
As Labour’s straight-listening express trundles through this area, immigration will be the hot topic. And what comes back won’t be pretty.
It was on Labour’s watch that the rightward drift in the debate on immigration happened. A succession of ministers were happy to bow to the Littlejohn platoons and show how ‘sound’ they were on immigration.
In the past few years, talk of “white working class” issues (you know, those special issues, that Asian or Afro-Caribbean working class families living in the same areas don’t have and can’t understand) with its relentless whistles have turned parts of the PLP into a Westminster version of one man and his dog.
And over the summer our leadership candidates fell over themselves to pay their respects at Mrs. Duffy’s doorstep. David Milliband even made it inside for a cup of tea.
She might be a nice old lady, a bit overwhelmed by the media scrum, but the substance of what she said is clear. Immigration is causing unemployment and the burden of immigrant claimants is preventing deserving Britons from getting their benefits.
This summer, not a single one of our princes standing for the leadership had the courage to simply say,
“No, Mrs. Duffy was wrong”.
Not one.
In this context it should be no surprise when some of the valued feedback from the great consulted will be that the problem is the “Pakis”. Or the “Blacks”. Or the “Eastern Europeans”, or tomorrow maybe the “Irish” or whoever happens to be the bête du jour. It might be put more politely in the consultation. But then again, it might not.
The progressive position on race and immigration hasn’t just been abandoned, but buried by our own side. Little wonder that the English Defence League continue to grow, the BNP threat remains just as potent at local elections and the narrative of Labour failure on immigration is now conventional wisdom.
On the other side of town, is another neighbourhood, lets call it “brown town”. Generations of Asian and Afro-Caribbean working class, big estates, low incomes, traditional Labour vote bank, rife with all the problems that decades of deprivation bring.
Unlike “white town”, the consultation convoy probably won’t stop here. In brown town things get done differently. Here, everything goes through the filter of the local boss. Why? Because that’s the way Labour party managers like it.
For the party leadership it’s about well drilled community machines delivering that grail of elections: low-effort, high-volume votes. No need to commit valuable central GOTV resources, limited face-time from the principal required and no tricky policy discussions that might wring out tough post-election commitments.
For the local bosses it’s about patronage. No-questions-asked on how they run their affairs in return for obsequious fealty and turning the crank on the machine when needed. Neighbourhoods are there to be delivered rather than engaged, active participation is actively discouraged and polls of popular opinion always give the right answer.
In this type of political environment, is it any surprise disillusioned young men and women in these places see no point in mainstream politics and drift to the radical fringe?
And if years of rightward drift have brought us to Mrs. Duffy’s door in white town, then Tower Hamlets Town Hall is where we have arrived at in brown town. Only the Keystone Cops of the London Labour party could have been shocked at the outcome of our summer rival to X-Factor, ‘what to do about a problem like Lutfur?’
The system made him; the system saved him, the system Labour put in place. A system that delivered Labour a whopping 25% of the vote in the Tower Hamlets Mayoral election.
It’s no use for the leadership to collectively close its eyes, cross its fingers and really, really hope everything is going to be ok in the upcoming festival of dialogue. It won’t.
As a direct result of the positions the party has adopted, racism is on the rise in white communities and disillusionment has never been higher in ethnic minority communities. Any consultation that bears a passing acquaintance with reality will reflect these truths.
The real question is, when they hear the message how will the party respond?
The choice is stark.
One path is marked “pander and stroke”. Pander to the angry in white town; stroke the bosses in brown town. The continuity option. Pay lip service to dialogue, start no difficult conversations and just nod, smile and agree with what you hear.
Think Sybil Fawlty saying “I know” repeatedly.
It’s the epitome of the comfort zone, all about short term advantage, but without any fundamental interest in people. It’s a well worn path for some members of the PLP where the worst panderers are often the most vigorous strokers.
The other path is more difficult. Lead the debate, don’t chase it. Show a bit of passion and believe in something enough to stand up and fight.
In white town, it means standing up and making the case for multi-cultural society, celebrating rather than just tolerating diversity. Call out racism for what it is and break the link between colour and issues like access to housing or quality of education.
In brown town, it means standing-up to old bosses, by-passing their machines and engaging members who have only ever been told their opinions. Break-up rotten structures and bring in some actual democracy where the truth matters more than North Korean majorities.
The common thread is about showing that we are more interested in people than the mechanics of power. That we have something to believe in that is worth fighting for.
Confidence and belief are compelling. Why not show some?
Only then will the fractures on Labour’s estates begin to heal, and the run on Labour’s vote banks be halted.
Pivotal choices like this don’t come round every year or even every decade. They are once in a generation.
But as yet the choice our new generation will make remains unclear.
Making the case, driving the change, requires leadership and vision which attracts and binds people to a cause. It puts fire in the belly and gives the words to change hearts.
Every ‘i’ doesn’t need to be dotted, nor each ‘t’ crossed, but a clear direction of travel must be established.
Pointing at a blank sheet of paper? ‘We’re waiting for the results of consultation?’
It’s not good enough.
Atul Hatwal is a community and social affairs consultant
Tags: BNP, communities, Labour Party, neighbourhoods, Racism, working class
You are supposed to splash on Brut aftershave,not drink it !!
Good luck.
Someone talking sense at last. The (high)amount of Labour people who think we don’t need to go onto housing estates when campaigning is quite frightening. Quite frankly, Ed Miliband does not appeal to these people. He looks like he comes straight out of leafy, middle class, liberal wherever. Someone needs to work on the man and fast. He needs voice coaching and posture lessons to get him to the levels of gravitas he’ll need to even have half a shot at no 10.
“In white town, it means standing up and making the case for multi-cultural society, celebrating rather than just tolerating diversity. Call out racism for what it is and break the link between colour and issues like access to housing or quality of education.
In brown town, it means standing-up to old bosses, by-passing their machines and engaging members who have only ever been told their opinions. Break-up rotten structures and bring in some actual democracy where the truth matters more than North Korean majorities.”
Do you propose to do this with people like your London Mayoral candidate? The former despise him, and he looks to the latter for exactly the type of communalist machine-made majorities you’re talking about.