npf

The National Policy Forum in Newcastle considered new

consultation papers on the economy; crime and justice; education

and skills; quality of life; transport, housing, local government and

the regions. Charles Clarke thanked officers and staff for support

during his year as Chair, and Ian McCartney was elected by

acclamation as his successor. Gordon Brown and John Reid spoke

briefly, and Tony Blair responded to questions on student funding,

the two-tier workforce and the Middle East. As a parent he worried

about top-up fees like everyone else, and he sympathised with

college lecturers whose income has risen by 5%, against 45% on

average earnings in the same period.

Many detailed points were raised, and revised drafts in January will

show how many have been taken on board. On education,

assurances that Labour was not returning to the eleven-plus ignored

the fact that areas like Kent have never left it. Parity of esteem for

vocational qualifications conflicted with targets suggesting that

higher education is superior, and the lifelong learning agenda

should be mentioned.

The quality of life paper rightly rejected the false opposition between

science and the environment claimed by the Greens. Many aims

were attractive, but likely to clash with those of other departments.

For instance, where transport policy tries to meet all demands,

sustainability requires reducing those demands. Nuclear waste

creates long-term storage problems, but the Department of Trade

and Industry is bailing out British Energy and talking about new

reactors. The Lottery proved controversial, with Kim Howells stating

bluntly that falling revenue would hit key government programmes.

Some members argued that lottery projects should go to the

poorest areas, who put in disproportionately large amounts.

The economy paper overlapped with welfare reform on child and

pensioner poverty, and with trade and industry on the national

minimum wage, where members asked for a higher level, index-

linking, abolition of the lower rate for under-22s, and protection for

under-18s. No-one was happy with including immigration and

asylum under crime and justice, but there was no other place to put

them. Specific questions on decriminalising drugs would be asking

for tabloid trouble, but members are welcome to make suggestions.

On housing, some felt that lengthy consultation on restricting or

abolishing the right to buy would panic tenants into buying before

the rules were changed, and reduce council house stocks to zero.

The government should act without further ado.

Other issues went beyond the documents. Record numbers of

submissions are coming in, but continuing failure to respond will

only stoke up cynicism. Constituency representatives agreed that

those on policy commissions should be more proactive in following

contributions through the process. Apparently Millbank is afraid that

individual commission members might stray from party lines, and

that wider circulation through e-mail and the internet would expose

internal divisions. The unanimous constituency response was that

the Forum is on probation with the party grassroots, and the status

quo is not an option.

While the Forum works towards the next manifesto, there is still no

way to handle immediate issues. Foundation hospitals, or charging

councils who cannot find homes for bed-blockers, never came

through the forum process, and the 2001 manifesto actually ruled

out top-up fees. Consultation on university funding and energy

policy will be completed without Forum input. Ministerial question-

and-answer sessions are no substitute, because they do not allow

structured debate or decision-making.

Relations between the Forum and the annual conference also came

under scrutiny. UNISON delegates pointed out that with a two-thirds

conference majority, an independent inquiry into Private Finance

Initiative schemes was now party policy. However, the resolution

has simply been referred back to the economic commission.

Constituency representatives on the commission felt that

conference posturing had frustrated their efforts to establish

consensus between the key players.

More worrying was the latest Forum newsletter, which said that

conference delegates overwhelmingly endorsed a National

Executive Committee statement giving a green light for war on Iraq

without United Nations authorisation. In fact the NEC withdrew this

statement before the debate, because we were told that it would be

defeated. There was no vote. Later editions carry the corrected

account.

Ann Black, 88 Howard Street, Oxford OX4 3BE, 01865-722230,

ann.black@unisonfree.net