Main menu:
Our newsletters
There was a full meeting of the NPF at Excel in London’s Docklands in July - this is our report.
The main purpose of the meeting was to discuss the draft for the first year policy document. As we said in previous issues, there will be one document covering all the policy areas. The meeting had to cover a lot of ground, and so there are reports in this issue on the subjects we discussed.
The first year policy document has now been finalised and will be sent out very soon to CLP secretaries and PiP co-ordinators. We have until March to send in submissions.
Just a reminder - if you are holding forums, please give us details and we will try to get to them.
Sustainable Communities–
By Beth Breeze
The workshops looking at Labour’s plans for creating sustainable communities were amongst the best attended, reflecting the breadth of work of this commission which includes community cohesion, social housing, transport, tackling climate change and long-term energy needs. Debate in the workshops focused on the consultation document that is the main output of this first year of the NPF’s work.
There was consensus that the document accurately captured the input from NPF and local party members in some areas, including Labour’s efforts to tackle the challenges posed by climate change. The Secretary of State, David Miliband, was present for the discussions and stated unequivocally that environmental implications are a key part of all Labour’s policy discussions. Similarly, the section of the consultation document covering energy policy was felt to adequately reflect the party’s concerns, though it was agreed to seek further input on how to incentivise domestic energy efficiency.
Housing and transport both generated lively debates that concluded with a number of constructive conclusions that strengthened this element of the NPF’s work. It was agreed to make stronger reference to direct investment and the need for a ‘level playing field’ in social housing, whilst maintaining secure public finances. In transport, NPF members successfully argued that greater attention should be drawn to the contribution of better local bus services, light rail, car-pooling and cycling schemes to ensure sustainable, integrated transport.
Our section of the consultation document has been immensely strengthened by the input of NPF discussions, all informed by input from local party members. I am looking forward to getting further feedback on our work so that we can prepare the strongest possible set of policies in this essential area that affects the daily lives of every member of our society.
Health – a lively debate
By Martin Phillips
We held two workshops on health during the weekend. Our Friday discussion was dominated by a Guardian story – the story claimed that the government were planning to privatise the entire management of the NHS. Patricia Hewitt gave us a copy of her statement to newspapers, stating that some NHS trusts wanted to bring in outside advisors on management systems like accounting and statistics. An advert in the EU journal to allow this had been badly worded and suggested the entire NHS management was to be privatised. I called for an enquiry into how this could happen. It will also not be compulsory for any PCT to use any outside supplier, although it is obvious that some trusts need to get help in areas like accounting.
We also discussed private involvement in the NHS, with a wide range of views, from “No private involvement at all” to the current amount – no one position held a majority. The current level was certainly regarded as the “high water mark”, to decline as waiting lists are eliminated. The group agreed that alternative provision should be used where the NHS could not provide services needed by local communities, such as the example we discussed of GP services in Barking, where the NHS has been unable to recruit GPs.
The other major theme of the weekend was how we could change NHS culture so that all managers feel accountable for their actions and how patients can be assured a high quality, consistent service. At my instigation, we discussed how local councillors could act as patient champions and scrutinise local health delivery – my question was welcomed in the consultation document. This idea is already being discussed at national level, as councillors can play a vital role in ensuring that local health services provide the standard of care that the community want. An extra question was also added on the choice debate: “How do we get the NHS to be more responsive to increased patient demand for choice?”
Liv Bailey’s view of Excel
The setting of NPF this time was an inspiring one, as it demonstrated the real results of the government's commitment to the regeneration of underprivileged areas. The BBQ in the evening was really rather tasty too!
There were three main aspects to the policy debate that drew my attention. A significant issue for me was that in both the Society, Equality & Citizenship and the Education documents, there seemed to be a lack of questions which would engage younger participants in the policy making process. I feel that consultations across the South East CLPs would really benefit from questions such as 'What do you think the new 14-19 curriculum should include to ensure young people value learning' which could encourage real and active debate from local young people. As it was the questions were very much along the lines of 'How can the 14-19 year old curriculum be changed to minimise problem students'. The difference, I'm sure you'll agree, is stark.
Another issue that I feel it is important to raise, again coming from discussions within the Society, Citizenship and Equalities document, was the issue of votes at 16. Consensus seemed to agree with the point I raised that by lowering the voting age we could ensure we eliminate the gap between the end of citizenship education in schools and reaching voting age, and that the vote would help to further engage young people in political processes. I was also concerned by the placing of the section on asylum and immigration within the Society document, and also for the failure to differentiate between asylum seekers and illegal immigration. Many shared this concern, and I am confident that the party will take this forward.
The documents overall, however, seem to be a really good foundation to stimulate debate amongst grass roots members. Please get in touch if you have any contributions to make, anything you want to ask me, or if you'd like me to come and help run a consultation for young people in your area.
Overall the NPF welcomed the Health document and the modifications asked for were to add rather than alter. We take this as a sign that we are going in the right direction!
Prosperity and Work by Deborah Gardiner
The setting for this NPF was astonishing, and a testament to the investment that has been made in this deprived part of London. Looking across the river at a large and very lovely housing development, I was told that 40% of the development was social housing. It should go without saying that this level of investment would not be happening without a Labour Government.
Hazel Blears gave a very positive, but realistic, analysis of the current political scene, highlighting the fact that the messages the electorate are giving political parties are complex e.g. Cameron doing reasonably well in the opinion polls but almost losing the Bromley by-election. She acknowledged that is was a difficult time for Labour party members, but reminded us that an active opposition, difficult decisions being taken and the need to work hard to get the story across is really just politics as usual. It’s easy to forget this, as we have been rather used to a supine opposition and a huge majority.
The NPF also heard speeches by Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and John Prescott. There were discussions on the Energy Review and Party Funding. Your SE CLP representatives had already undertaken a consultation on funding, and the results were fed into the discussion.
The Prosperity and Work Commission section of the policy document was broadly welcomed, with some additions to the subjects for discussion within the Party, including what more we can do to tackle inequality and poverty; what further support families need and how best do we help people move into work? It was also suggested that there should be further emphasis in the document of fairness at work, health and safety, corporate social responsibility and women and work. In particular, NPF representatives were keen that the greater participation of women in science should be encouraged and fostered, and more generally that the role of science, engineering and technology should have a greater profile in schools. It was also suggested that challenges presented by globalisation should have a much higher profile, with particular reference to what we should be doing to help lower-skilled workers, what impact globalisation has on economic migration. The issue of security and dignity in retirement was discussed, and although, broadly, people were happy with the Pensions White Paper, there was a request for a more information to be given to Party members on this issue, and a greater emphasis on the important contribution made both socially and economically by carers.
I really hope that when constituency parties receive the document, they will continue to make submissions on these vital areas of government policy in preparation for the next manifesto.
The NPF meeting and implementing the Warwick Agreement
By Simon Burgess
Having only relatively recently become a vice-chair of the NPF it was important to me that the agenda of the forum reflected the wishes of its members. The biggest challenge was that the World Cup was on, with England playing Portugal on the second day. After asking some members of the forum, from around the country, the consensus was that the meeting should run up to the match so that those who wanted to watch it could do so in the bar, without being stuck half way home at the time it started.
With that vital issue sorted, but sadly not the result of the match, feedback from the last forum was that the workshops, when members get to tell ministers some harsh realities as well as good ideas, were too short - so they were extended for this one. Members had asked for more opportunity to discuss contemporary issues so there were Q&A's with ministers on energy policy, party funding and public service reform.
However just to show that you can never get things quite right there was some criticism afterwards that we had too many Q&A's, perhaps because the workshops were longer members found themselves going over the same issues twice. We always need to tweak agendas, but I'd rather a government minister heard our ideas and concerns twice, than not at all.
Finally, because it's what our members will need to get grips with, there's the new single policy document. This was a suggestion from the review of Partnership in Power - I'm not convinced that what was meant was something that has turned out as long as sticking all the old documents together but that's what we have from the policy commissions. I'd encourage CLPs and branches to pick a certain sections to focus on so that members can engage with something of a manageable size. Please do get involved in the process - prioritise what interests your members/ your communities.
The Warwick Agreement
The final meeting of the NPF before the last election produced the Warwick Agreement - an historic agreement between all the party's shareholders: the unions, CLPs and government. This helped deliver us a third term and showed Partnership in Power at its best. Your NPF reps have been monitoring its implementation closely - the progress so far bodes well for the future positive relationship between the party's stakeholders.
Hazel Blears has produced a report on the progress that has been made in implementing the agreement. We have already circulated a copy of that report to our email list, but a copy is also available on our website www.npf-se.org.uk.