Labour party conference: time for a change?

I know the summer holidays are now upon us but before long Labour party members (along with the Tories and Lib Dems) will be turning their attention to annual conference. The autumn season of party conferences represents a tradition every bit as venerable as that of fish and chips on the pier, Brighton rock and Blackpool tram cars. However there are many – me included – who believe that the party political conference, like the traditional British seaside holiday, is an institution that has seen better days. In fairness I am not suggesting that Labour need do away with its annual conference altogether but I do feel that we can greatly improve on its present format and organisation. One of the main reasons for reforming how, where and when conference is organised is what it ends up costing ordinary members – especially in terms of travel, accommodation and time. Last year a delegate from Scotland told me that she had taken a week’s annual leave to attend her first and (given what it was costing her) probably her last conference. A significant number of delegates I spoke to over the past few years have told me that that they had often been forced to take unpaid leave in order to attend conference as they simply could not get the time off work in any other way. Having a party conference that only takes place on weekdays means that the only people who can easily attend are the people who are paid to, some retired people (I stress ‘some’), people who are independently wealthy - or just fanatics. If we are serious about reforming and renewing as a party then we need to make conference much more accessible for working people and particularly young working people.The party understands that it needs to re-think exactly how it sets about reconnecting with the grass roots of the movement. What the other parties do is up to them but in a time of renewal and reconnection Labour needs to think long and hard about how it organises its traditional annual shindig.

Here are three practical suggestions:

1. Hold conference over a long weekend - this could assist in helping the party to reach out and reconnect with ordinary party members. Holding the conference throughout a working week makes it very difficult for many working people to attend and therefore participate in what is the party’s largest annual event.

2. Move on permanently from hosting conference in traditional seaside resorts like Blackpool, Brighton or Bournemouth. The last annual conference held in Manchester and was viewed by most delegates as a huge success. Why not consider hosting future conferences in cities like Birmingham, Newcastle or Glasgow?

3. Emphasise that we are a ‘British’ party by occasionally holding annual conference in Scotland, Wales or even Northern Ireland.

Or am I being too timid, too conservative in my ideas for change? What do others think

Banning the burqa is an answer to the wrong question

There is a passage in Mein Kampf where Adolf Hitler describes how, walking through the streets of Vienna he sees a man with black hair locks. Is this a Jew? He asks himself at first before rephrasing the question to: is this a German? The debate about the wearing of the burqa though dressed up in the language of ‘identity’ politics is really just plain, old fashioned ‘ugly’ politics; it is the politics of the gutter. It is clearly as ludicrous for the state to force women to wear the burqa as it is to compel them not to.

Wearing the burqa does create some challenges in a free society. I am strongly of the view that women should be required to show their faces at all border stops and airports for example. It is also perfectly reasonable that any veiled woman pulled over for speeding would be required to raise her veil when presenting her pictured driver's licence. However the creation of a national dress code is wrong. Just because some people may take offence about the way some women dress should not mean we have to prohibit the way they dress. Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, is absolutely right when she argues that “political and legislative culture that conflates irritation, offence, alarm and distress promotes a general fear of difference and dissent”.

I am not arguing that we should not question the use of the burqa, far from it. While the burqa has found fervent advocates amongst some of its users, there have been powerful arguments against its proliferation in a progressive, modern world which seeks gender equality. In an age when men and women are perceived as equal, what exactly is the role of the burqa which well and truly wraps the woman in a cloak of invisibility?

Labour should bring back BSF

Ambition drives success. When launched in February 2004, Building school for the future (BSF) was the largest and most ambitious scheme of its kind anywhere in the world. Its aim was to transform education for some 3.3m pupils aged 11 to 19. BSF was designed to give schools the opportunity to make transformational changes – it was about achieving step change, not incremental change. Thanks to the Tory Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove (abetted by his Lib Dem allies) this opportunity, this ‘once in a generation’ opportunity has now gone. So what should Labour do now? How should it respond to the new education landscape? Simply expressing annoyance can never be enough, ‘raging against the machine’ is an emotion, not a policy or a winning strategy.

Education goes to the heart of what the Labour party stands for, everything we must do to make a Britain a fairer and more equal society. Our record in office these past 13 years is one we can be proud of. However the truth still remains that our education system has always been excellent for a minority - educated at many of the best schools and universities in the world, achieving the highest international standards for the top 10%. The cancellation of BSF which in effect means the denial of 5 star teaching facilities for millions of our young people will only entrench the three-tierism of the past: excellence for a minority, mediocrity for the majority, outright failure at the bottom.

Labour must make the case in opposition that it is no longer enough to simply talk about providing educational opportunities for all; educational achievement must be extended too. Creating an education system that extends opportunity and achievement for all whilst at the same time promoting equity and excellence, this must be Labour’s programme for government in the future. This isn't just a distant aspiration. The unambiguous evidence from our best all-ability schools today is that where aspirations are high and the parental support strong, then the great majority of young people can and do achieve in terms of good GCSEs at 16 and progression to further qualifications beyond, whether vocational or academic. In a successful school, achievement isn't a matter of IQ or social class: it is a matter of teaching, aspiration and hard work, underpinned by a school culture which nurtures all three.

We are confronted by a Tory led coalition that appears, both economically and socially, to believe that more means worse and that success is only valuable if it co-exists with widespread failure. These aren't just abstract principles. They continue to animate the Conservative party in its whole approach to education.

Labour must make the case for radical and progressive change. We can continue in the way the education system has for generations: tolerating the failure of some children because of the achievement of a few; accepting mediocrity for the many as the price of advantage for an elite; even going back to selecting children for failure at 5, 11 or 16. Or we can become a country which believes in every child and expects excellence for all; where the talent of every citizen is nurtured and encouraged, from the earliest years onwards; where no child's education is written off because of who they are or where they're from. Labour was founded on educational opportunity and achievement for all and its commitment to rebuilding or refurbishing our nation’s schools under BSF was ambitious and inspired.

The next Labour government should bring back the programme, though this time it should be less bureaucratic and more focused on improving pedagogy. Our opponents will say that it cannot be afforded but the truth is we can’t afford not to.