“Better Things To Do With Our Time? A Progressive Vision of Citizenship”
1 May 2007, Local Government House, Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ
Speakers: Rt Hon Ed Miliband MP, Tim Horton (The Fabian Society) Polly Toynbee (The Guardian) Ben Page (Ipsos-MORI)
Chair: Stella Creasy (Involve)
Page repeated his presentation regarding the condition of the public realm as previously given at the seminar with Oliver Letwin on the same subject. In response, Ed Miliband MP set out how the traditional vision of the welfare state was limited because it did not take into account the expertise of the user in determining how a service was provided. Discussing citizen empowerment Miliband focused on personal budgeting in social services as a model of individual empowerment through collective power. Essential to the notion of accountability, Miliband noted, is the provision information about the institutions which provide services to citizens. In this respect, Miliband argued, the police are an unaccountable institution. Drawing on the last ten years of Labour Government, Miliband noted that the political and social change which had happened over this period had largely come about through the collective action of citizens rather than any top-down measures from central Government. Miliband concluded his delivery asserting that “progressive society needs empowered citizens.”
Ben Page, Ed Miliband MP, Stella Creasy, Tim Horton, Polly Toynbee.
Polly Toynbee argued that one of the problems with New Labour was that it did not “set up a flag”; that is, they did not state their values publicly. This, Toynbee claimed, has led to a loss of the traditional tribal loyalty associated with political movements and diminishes the perception of continuity of Government initiatives. Toynbee argued by introducing the choice agenda, Government had given people individualism and consumerism instead of citizenship. Reenergising the public sphere, she claimed, requires Government to answer the question: “involved in what and for what?”. She concluded reemphasising the need for Government to offer citizens something to believe in.
Tim Horton began his response noting the healthy state of single issue groups in the public realm. Horton tied this to the central theme of tackling anti-political sentiment which, Horton claimed, is based on a misunderstanding of the political process. Elaborating, Horton explained that the anti-politics is based on an individualistic distancing from the state and the public realm. He explained that this discourse allows anti-political actors the freedom of to make blanket criticisms of Government whilst absolving themselves of any public responsibility. Horton continued highlighting the differences between democratic decision making and consumerism and arguing that in creating consumer society politicians create unrealistic perceptions of the way in which Government works. Horton noted the Left have an interest in fighting anti-political sentiment based on the shared ideology of solidarity and collective sentiment.
Responding to questions about making participation meaningful and tailoring opportunities for young people, Miliband recognised that time constraints were a key factor in determining participation and noted that “Government can consult too much”. Page noted that for young people growing up is about finding themselves, not just about understanding society and that should be taken into account when designing participation initiatives. Toynbee argued that introducing measures such as voting at 16 and proportional representation would help overcome the current “disconnect between the expectations and realities of collective decision making”.