The Future is more individual members

I am reminded by the campaign of Crispin Flintoff for the NEC how important every Labour member can be. Those of us living in non-target constituencies, often in tiny minorities among myriad Tories, may be forgiven for feeling that our membership and our vote count for nothing, democratically. Crispin's stance for a mass membership emphasises that every subscription counts, especially when Union support is reducing. Each new member brings cash to the Party which it could take considerable efforts to raise in other ways. This is value.
We also need to feel that our opinions matter, though. How this can work is problematic. Reading Al Gore's book "The Future" offers a clue:
"Our first priority should be to restore our ability to communicate clearly and candidly with one another in a broadly accessible forum about the difficult choices we have to make. That means building vibrant and open "public squares" on the Internet for the discussion of the best solutions to emerging challenges and the best strategies for seizing opportunities... and protecting the public forum from dominance by elites and special interests with agendas that are inconsistent with public interest."
This is exemplified by our support for Labour Coast and Country, the embryonic forum for rural and isolated non-urban Labour people. The future lies in people with similar agendas being able, through the Internet, to share their ideas, shape policy recommendations and inform the Party with their expertise.
Tom Serpell

Why radical is best

There really is almost no point in Labour sticking to a me-too list of policies, hoping to win on grounds of managerial credibility or not being Tories. Even in the unlikely scenario of a victory in such circumstances, what would this do for the people of this country? More austerity, less public services, growing inequality leading to stress and misery for millions. Unless Labour is prepared to offer  real change, not just of masthead but of substance, it may as well save its campaign budget for a further 5 years.
This country is getting richer again, according to the Government. No. Some few people and corporations are getting richer as they cream off dividends and asset inflation into tax-minimising investments. The vast majority of voters and non-voters are left to pick over the slim pickings of lower wages or lower social security as they attempt to make a living, never mind a comfortable life for themselves and others. This is not about old-style class warfare but a need for the earnings of this country being shared more fairly among those who contribute to their generation in return for electoral support.
Without social change and a refocusing of politics onto the holistic needs of all citizens, UK will cease to be a democracy in more than name, as its governance increasingly ends in the hands of huge corporations unaccountable to the public. This trend can either be maintained under a Tory self-interest agenda; or reversed by a Labour-led evolution in favour of mutuality and concern for the well-being of all and accountable through retention or restoration of public services and social influence over infrastructure.
Labour has been drip-feeding encouraging policy ideas, no doubt to test public reaction. This will no doubt be assessed by huge representative committees. Such methodology can only regress to the mean. The Leader of the party has to take this agenda by the scruff of the neck, shake out the managerialists and tell the country where he will take us and how, as far away from the greed and power accretion of the current oligarchy as possible. Then Labour will be true to its values and present a true alternative which can hope to make the country a better place.

Justice - for whom?

All political parties must embrace a justice system but there are no absolutes in justice. Despite what those in power may claim, there are options as to how justice can be defined and achieved. These options must be based on the values of the Party. A government which values wealth above all else has focused on reducing the amount of money allowed to the poorest, as if this money were stolen from others. The justice system is increasingly used to the disadvantage of the weakest in society, unprotected increasingly by legal aid. Trust in policing has become frayed by decades of practices revealed as corrupt or prejudiced. Prosecutions are common for petty crime while those responsible for the loss to society of billions are seen to be immune. Trust needs to be restored in the institutions for justice to be done and perceived to be done for all.

As demonstrated by "The Spirit Level", trust [as well as health] is lower in countries with higher income difference, which has gone out of control in UK. An alternative government which prioritises social justice is more likely to create a culture of mutual trust. Can a society in these days be less unequal? The gulf between richest and poorest is almost half in the Nordic countries that in USA and UK.

Labour must return to power, with an agenda to restore justice for all: detection and prosecution focused on the crimes which most damage the country, tax fraud, digital theft, financial malfeasance, people trafficking, unfair rents and employment practices, on a national or international level; but at a local level, crime prevention through local knowledge and a presence in communities, with mediation, community resolution and restorative justice as tools to keep costs down and reduce prosecution and imprisonment for those least equipped to function in society. Labour can be the ground-breaking Party which decriminalises drug-taking, to expose and squeeze out the illegal dealers and introducing controls to make safe what people buy and consume.

By targeting the right resources at what most damages society, justice can still be achieved affordably, without removing from those most in need of it the vital resource of legal aid from properly remunerated lawyers. This is everyday justice affecting employment, housing, clinical negligence, and unfair arrest, protecting people instead of criminalising them.

Grayling is failing; Sadiq can succeed.

Tom Serpell

We need a team which expects to win. Sack the doubters, Ed

After the last General Election, who would have said that Labour could even think of winning back power after one term in opposition? Pundits wrote off Labour for a generation in the aftermath of the disastrous Brown administration and ridiculous, drawn-out leadership contest. Today, the media are yet again giving vent to their inbuilt anti-Labour bias, focussing on a Leader who is attempting radical change of the sort they all knew would be necessary for Labour to re-build; yet which they fear and hate. Why? Because they know that the reality favours a Labour win next year.

Labour has been ahead in the polls form months, despite their best endeavours. From what they write one could be forgiven for thinking that Labour was dead in the water, with no hope of victory, yet here we are with a besieged leader, still 4 points ahead, with the new policies gradually unfolding into a story which will regain popularity further; and with a demographic advantage which would see Labour win even at Party parity.

We have to put up with the media bias but surely not internal sniping, presumably by remnants of New Labour still trying to justify themselves. It is totally unacceptable for shadow ministers to brief against the Leader who appointed them, whose loyalty he is entitled to assume. Ed M should find out who these are and remove them summarily. Just as the best of England's football team were the new blood, so let us go into the election with a new, talented young team, supportive of Ed Miliband, rather than one containing rotten apples whose malign influence can only damage the motivation of the thousands of volunteers working for a Labour win. They are certainly entitled to expect a cohesive, loyal team as they strive for a Government which will make Britain a fairer country.

What is going on in Birmingham's schools?

This is not a rhetorical question but a meaningful one for all Labour supporters regardless of their knowledge and experience of education. With scapegoating, scaremongering and school-bashing – by politicians, political placemen such as Ofsted leaders and the media, all of whom should know better, we are not getting any hard evidence of what is wrong. Why not? – is it because some very plump chickens, having been fed on irrational policies are coming home to roost? Is it because academic success and Islam cannot be linked by some with a different ideological if not racist viewpoint? Is it because it diverts from a collective political fear of the economy/cost of living and electoral defeat? Or is it because actually nobody knows what to do?

The children involved - and in many other parts of the country as well, have been used disgracefully in this politically motivated free for all. It makes a mockery of the Tories (very quiet Lib-Dems on this) even mentioning safeguarding when political squabbles are being ratcheted up, personalised and  professionals demonised when children are literally just going to school to learn (and for some at the moment doing life-changing exams).

The education system in this country is a mess. It is a fragmented and unsafe environment for our children who, remember, only get one go at it – you are only seven years old once in your life. It has become the post-code lottery that we tried hard to remove from Health provision only to resurrect it within Education. We now know that the government, through Ofsted, want seven year olds to be warned about extremism….this must be part of the so-called British way of life. Does this apply to Jewish, Catholic, C of E schools? Did the country vote for that? There are so many instances of incoherent thinking at Government level.

The Labour party, rather than a half-hearted response to a government statement with Tory-lite proposals has to be clear. All state-funded schools, whether LA maintained, trust academies, sponsored academies, free, nursery, primary, secondary, tertiary schools etc. must be secular. If private schools want to be faith schools, then parents and the community must be sure how the teachers behave as professionals regarding the teaching of religious beliefs. The Labour Party could of course grasp the nettle this time around and not give charitable status to the faith schools as this is tantamount to state funding.

Birmingham schools have finally exposed the quagmire of Education policy – be courageous and reach out Labour!

Elisabeth Rumbold

Labour's choice of words

There may be a cost of living issue, as food and energy prices rise, but this mantra is beginning to sound stale and even misses the point. For many in our unequal society it it not so much that costs have gone up as that incomes are artificially and ideologically depressed by this vicious oligarchy of wealthy elitists. With millions out of work not receiving a Living benefit and millions more in work which does not pay basic bills, the political failure must be seen as one of pay rather than of prices.
Until Labour articulates the realities of life for those it seeks to represent, it will continue to look like another metropolitan clique, instead of an empathetic friend. UKIP has illustrated the power of simple messages which hit the spot for their minority following, now Labour needs to do the same for the majority by correctly diagnosing the problems people face and saying how it will govern, preferably very differently from the Coalition. Let's hear more about social security, independent living and proper pay; and less about strengthening banks, more austerity and tired old phrases.

#Labour must challenge the Establishment not be part of it

Across Europe, traditionally dominant parties have been rocked by the support for anti-Establishment movements. These are neither all left nor right. Some are anti-austerity; others anti-EU. All seek to wrest power from long-established, dominant power blocs.

Labour under Blair strove and succeeded in becoming a part of The Establishment, friend to bankers, media bosses and big business. It is surely time to return to Labour as a movement for change, challenging the powers that be. The 1% represented so consistently by the Tories controls not only a disproportionate amount of the wealth and earnings of capitalism but also of the levers of power. Labour leaders increasingly try to look and act like these, instead of representing the 99% and trying to change the power base.

There is both a tribal vote for Labour and support for it as a party with values and principles, particularly relating to fairness. Farage, Le Pen and Tsipras have shown that there is a desire on the part of voters to be led by people who connect with them and who are prepared to stand up to the powerful, stand up for the weak, and have the courage to endure some unpopularity in the name of doing what is needed.

Labour is and should be the party of Europe; of women; of ethnic minorities; of the disabled; of the economically excluded - and say so, even if some powerful interests do not like this.