Chuka Umunna MP – waiting in the Shadows?

During a recent trip to Exeter, Harrison Jones, Online News Editor met Chuka Umunna, Labour MP for Streatham and Labour’s Shadow Business Secretary. Here, he tells us all about it…

Image credits: The Guardian

Oddly located yet modern and bright, there is an obscure building on Streatham Campus called the Innovation Centre, and standing in the spacious lobby, deep in thought, is a man tipped by some as a future Prime Minister.

Chuka Umunna’s body language is open, his persona calm and head tilted to attention: he’s listening.

The Labour MP for Streatham certainly looks the part, but perhaps in somewhat unconventional fashion – The Daily Mail has labelled him the ‘Black Blair,’ others the ‘British Obama.’

Whilst Umunna tucks into a generous helping from the buffet laid on for the event, Exeter’s MP, Ben Bradshaw, is also the focus of some attention in the corner of the room, chatting away to various suited males who seem to think that they are important. The pair are here for an event with businesses from across the South West, with Shadow Business Secretary Umunna discussing how to return growth to the region.

As the two MPs interact it is striking that despite public cries of “they’re all the same,” these two politicians represent success stories for British minority groups. Sure, they are middle class and male, but Bradshaw is also one of very few openly homosexual MPs. Umunna, meanwhile, comes from a business/legal background and just like Bradshaw, is not Oxbridge-educated. Perhaps more importantly though, the 35-year-old hails from a multicultural background, being of Nigerian and Irish descent.

“We have a democratic crisis in this country,” he opens gravely, in a confident fashion belying his age.

“I believe people are more political than they have been for a long time – they’ve never felt so distant from politics and politicians. People like me need to get out more and talk to people, so I seek to do that.”

Hands clasped together, he laughs before casually swotting away the obvious question about any future leadership of the Labour party.

“You don’t go into politics for praise and adulation, you go into politics to change things. You don’t go into politics to get a particular role, you go into politics to effect some real, positive change for lots of people.”

Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw and Chuka Umunna, MP for Streatham and Labour’s Shadow Business Secretary
Image credits: Harrison Jones

Its quickly becoming obvious that Umunna is a master of getting his pre-prepared message across no matter what the question and, with his assistant already twitchy about timings, that he is particularly talented at talking – seemingly ceaselessly.

“I campaigned really hard for my friend Ed Miliband to become the leader of our party,” he continues. Perhaps tellingly, he then subtly adds: “We can have hypothetical conversations about things in 20 years but what really matters is what happens now.”

Umunna’s narrative of the current climate is far from rosy, as he pays heed to Labour’s new economic criticism of the government which now centres around living standards.

“The British public are coming out of three years of flatlining growth – i.e., no growth – I don’t think they will be turning around and patting George Osborne on the back. The question is, you know, what is actually happening in people’s pay packets? And in 39 of the last 40 months, you’ve seen prices rising faster than wages, and on average British workers have sustained a £1,600 pay cut since the coalition have come to government.”

“The real question is: do people feel better off now than they did in 2010? And they don’t. They feel: ‘I’ve been working harder than ever before, I’m getting paid less, and things cost more.’”

Its a similar message to Ed Balls’, but the delivery is noticeably different. Informal and measured – yet still cutting – Umunna has a reflective quality to his speech, he pauses, he smiles, he’s expressive: when he speaks people listen. That is not evident in most politicians. And though it is a stretch to label him a ‘maverick,’ he manages to tick all the boxes whilst retaining a unique style.

Open to talking about things others avoid, Umunna – like his leader – is unafraid of using the ‘S’ word: “I’m quite happy to be described as a democratic socialist or a social democrat,” he says. Though when you consider that Tony Blair – perhaps the most right-wing Labour leader in history – was the first leader to call Labour a socialist party, the claim does not necessarily mean much.

Indeed, the ideological comparison with Blair has been noted by many. Umunna would not hesitate to send his children to private school, he values the market and says he is relaxed about “people getting filthy rich.” He even has a close relationship with the former prime minister, alongside the likes of Peter Mandelson and Michael Hesseltine.

Interesting then, that Ed Miliband – who has little in common with ‘New Labour’ values – would help Umunna to become an MP and then appoint him to the shadow cabinet, just 18 months after being elected.

But it is a sign of how much Umunna stands out, managing to balance the perception of a serious, thoughtful MP, with a relaxed and suave 30-something; whose accent slides between estuary English and polished private school tones. In an era when the perpetual cry of “they’re all the same” ring about a politically disenchanted public, Umunna’s appearance, name and background are refreshingly different, making him the perfect retort for that flawed statement.

Such credentials make him a prime candidate for Labour leadership – and possibly more. But whilst British politics needs change and Umunna represents people other MPs can not, it is his ideological similarity to some parliamentarians – namely Tony Blair – which could be far more ominous than those politicians who are “all the same.”

Harrison Jones, Online News Editor

Find Exeposé Features on Facebook and Twitter.

Comment on Andrew Lansley MP

Dave Reynolds attended yesterday’s Politics Society talk with current Conservative MP and Leader of the House of Commons Andrew Lansley. Here’s what he made of it all.

Andew Lansley, current Leader of the House of Commons and former Secretary of State for Health gave a talk yesterday named “Life in Government”. Lansley is a former Politics student of the University of Exeter. He was also elected President of the Guild of Students during his time here.

“Throughout the questioning, it must be said that Lansley remained a calm and collected speaker, answering confidently on a wide range of issues.”
Photo Credits: Politics Society

He talked about his experiences as one of the most important members of the cabinet. He cited the media, judicial reviews, the strength of the civil service and Europe as the main reasons why politics has changed so much since the 1980s.

Without naming names, he believed that some politicians were in it purely for themselves but he wasn’t one of these.  In an unrelated story, in the parliamentary expenses scandal in 2009, Lansley was accused of flipping his second home, claiming thousands of pounds of tax payers’ money on furniture. All of this however, was well within the rules at the time.

While shadow health secretary, he accepted a donation of £21,000 from the chairman of a private healthcare provider. Such companies stood to be the largest beneficiaries of Lansley’s NHS bill.

The talk wasn’t the real reason why everyone attended. The Q&A session was always going to be the fun part. When asked for his views on the European Union, he categorically stated that he would be voting to stay in the EU in the proposed 2017 referendum. He stated that Europe being involved in our policy making process was a positive and that it would be wrong to make policy in isolation. However, he was sceptical of any more political integration between European states. He does not want to see a United States of Europe.

If he wasn’t a politician, he said that his preferred job would be as an archaeologist.

Responding to one of the questions regarding the NHS, Andrew Lansley told an audience member to read the Conservatives’ 2010 Manifesto. While this may be possible, it is very sad that the Conservative Party have deleted all press releases and speeches between 2000 and 2010 from their website and have also been hidden from search engines.  At the time of writing, Labour have announced that they plan to do the same. All a bit odd!

Throughout the questioning, it must be said that Lansley remained a calm and collected speaker, answering confidently on a wide range of issues.

Audience reaction from the talk was mixed. 3^rd year Economics and Politics student Nick Best thought “…the talk was really good. He dealt with the questions on the NHS from the members of Labour students with ease.”

VP of Politics Society Duncan Steadman said, “It was a great talk and I really enjoyed it. Hopefully we can get some more high profile speakers down to Exeter soon.”

John Chilvers was not so complimentary. He said, “[Andrew Lansley] didn’t answer the questions correctly. He tried to get around every question by avoiding the core issues. There’s a video of him saying that he wants to reorganise the NHS and yet today he says that he didn’t say that.  It’s very good of him to come down here but unfortunately he didn’t answer any of our questions and he was very patronising to the audience.

Scott Pepe thought, “… it was a very interesting talk. It’s great to get an Exeter alumnus down and a government minister. It was good to hear a full diversity of opinions represented in the audience and as President of DebSoc that obviously is what I really like to see”.

A big thank you to the Politics Society for organising the event. They are delighted to announce that you can now buy Winter Ball tickets online. Follow this link to the Guild website.

Dave Reynolds

Did you attend the talk? Is this a fair version of events? We’d love to hear from you. Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Ben Bradshaw: Unrealistic and Populist?

Deputy Chairman of Exeter University Conservative Future Chris Carter claims that Ben Bradshaw showed the same unrealistic and populist approach currently used by Labour’s leadership in his recent interview with Exeposé Features.

Ben Bradshaw’s views appear to be typical of the approach used by Labour against the coalition: there is plenty of criticism of government policy but no realistic solutions.  Bradshaw is described in the article as “down-to-earth” yet this stands at odds with his laudation of Labour’s aim of getting 50% of young people into higher education, whilst this may seem to be a charming and noble objective it once again shows a failure to recognise reality. The reason why the UK was in such a dire economic situation at the beginning of the decade was that the governments of Blair and Brown made ridiculous promises to impress the electorate and then attempted to fulfil them by spending and borrowing more and more. This, as any adult with a basic grip on reality would tell you, is not sustainable. People know that they cannot keep borrowing money without a realistic plan to repay it, yet Labour believes that the same basic rules do not apply to governments.

“The simple fact of the matter is that higher education is meant to be exclusive by its very nature; if everyone in the country had a 2nd in Marketing then the degree itself would be worthless.”
Image credits: Niklas Rahmel.

The simple fact of the matter is that higher education is meant to be exclusive by its very nature; if everyone in the country had a 2^nd in Marketing then the degree itself would be worthless. Labour’s policy towards higher education has not only been economically harmful but also damaging to the degrees and higher education itself. The large number of universities and the generous funding they received from Labour has led to a countless array of useless degrees ranging from David Beckham studies at Staffordshire University to Surfing Studies at Plymouth University. If Bradshaw is right that higher education should be paid for by the government is it really fair that ordinary taxpayers should have to fork out on such worthless courses?

By making students pay in part for their courses the government is encouraging them to think about both their willingness to do the course and also the usefulness of the degree in their later lives. Students should not just think of university as 3 years of drinking and partying with a couple of lectures thrown in for good measure. Rather, they should consider the value of the course they are applying for and how it would be relevant to getting a job later in life and then choose one accordingly. This, more than anything else, would help make the UK workforce more competitive in the global economy as students would come out of university with a sought after degree and hence be more attractive to future employers.

Youth unemployment is indeed an issue and as demonstrated above sending more off to university is not the solution. Instead the government needs to focus on improving primary and secondary education so that teenagers who finish secondary school are given the best chance to succeed in the highly competitive job market. The current reforms initiated by Michael Gove are indeed aiming to achieve that and I for one think that the education minister deserves praise for his efforts to focus schools’ attention on the main subjects of English and Maths, which have been neglected for easier subjects for too long.

For those who have left school with minimal qualifications, thanks to years of neglect under previous governments, then I support the use of the carrot and stick approach. For the carrot I support the government’s deregulation of the labour market, red tape is preventing companies from employing more young people, and through its encouragement of training schemes and internships. Labour and many teens may scoff that many of these are unpaid and so don’t count, and so aren’t worth doing. This is precisely what is wrong with the younger generations, a willingness to pass on jobs and opportunities which they regard as ‘menial’ and ‘beneath them.’ This is the reason why youth unemployment is increasing, the older generations are taking any opportunity for employment they can get whilst younger generations are not. To try and solve this culture of expectancy I support the stick approach whereby young unemployed people have to work for their benefits rather than just accept them as a free hand-out.  It is all very well for Bradshaw and Labour to talk about how bad youth unemployment is but how much do we hear about focused and realistic solutions? Very little.

Bradshaw has long prided himself as being different from most Labour MP’s and in some ways he is. He at least didn’t go to Oxbridge, yet his rhetoric and policies, or lack thereof, shows the same popularity seeking approach advocated by Labour’s leadership. A lack of serious substance and realistic objectives show that Labour still has not learnt its lessons from the recession that they caused and why they still cannot be trusted to govern.

N.B I found the Lib Dems “direct deceit of the electorate” very amusing coming from someone who had served in Blair’s 2001-5 government.

Christopher Carter

Do you agree with Christopher’s characterisation of Bradshaw? What proportion of young people should be going into higher education? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Features Exclusive: Interview With Ben Bradshaw MP

Image credits: Niklas Rahmel

During the summer, Exeposé Online Features’ Editors Meg Lawrence and Imogen Watson video-interviewed Exeter’s Labour MP Ben Bradshaw in his office in Parliament (with a little technical help from XTV). Here, he tells Meg Lawrence what he thinks about students, schools, streetlights and much more.

You can watch the video interview at the bottom of the page.

Friendly, down-to-earth, well-humoured and approachable, Ben Bradshaw is not your stereotypical MP. Relatively unmoved by the trappings of power and privilege the politician, who has represented his Devon seat since 1997, is as proud of his political achievements as he is of his city.

Away from the West Country, Bradshaw’s Westminster office is also relaxed. His young team are chatty and enthusiastic, and clearly share their boss’s political vision.

That vision is a healthy mix of political ambition and a desire to improve the life of his constituents but it is tinged by the frustration that is an obvious hangover of opposition politics. Higher Education, he fears, is a typical casualty of a government that has forgotten to look out for young people.

‘In a global economy it’s going to be increasingly important in my view that people are qualified up to degree level. We saw a big expansion in higher education under the Labour government, I worry that this has stalled under this government,’ he admits. ‘It is becoming increasingly more difficult for people not least to be able to afford [higher education].’

Bradshaw still stands by Labour’s aim to get fifty per cent of young people in higher education.  ‘If we’re to compete in the modern world in the future, in a globalised economy, we can either compete on the basis of low wages and low income… or on the basis of our knowledge and our skills,’ he says.

Bradshaw is against the recent increase in tuition fees and believes the Liberal Democrats have betrayed young people in a ‘direct deceit of the electorate’. He adds: ‘The Liberal Democrats made a clear pledge at the last election- you may remember Nick Clegg travelled around the country with his Liberal Democrat MPs holding up placards saying we will abolish tuition fees, and one of the first things the coalition did when they got into office was treble tuition fees.’

Given the chance of being in government, Bradshaw insists he would campaign to reduce tuition fees –  although he doesn’t think it will ever return to being as low as £3,000 a year.

Image credits: Niklas Rahmel.

‘The current Labour policy is to reduce fees to £6,000 as an initial step, but I think we need to look at much more imaginative ways to make the funding of higher education fairer. We also need to address very urgently the trend we’ve seen in the last few years of people from middle and lower income families being put off going into higher education because of fears of getting into debt.’

Bradshaw believes it is a ‘terrible tragedy’  that people are put off going to university for fear of getting into debt and although this hasn’t been apparent in his home constituency, many universities are struggling to fill courses with a 6.6% drop in applicants to university nationwide.

But Bradshaw warns that universities like Exeter cannot afford to be complacent. ‘Exeter University has done a great job under its current Vice Chancellor [Steve Smith] over recent years in terms of expanding access. It has spent a lot of money on bursaries for students, and has also encouraged more people from the local area to go to university, but we absolutely do have to keep an eye on this, because it’s always going to be tempting for universities when they’re cash-strapped, to focus on those students who they feel will bring in the most cash.’

With its high entry levels and expensive rents, Exeter has a reputation for being a middle class student magnet but Bradshaw believes the situation is improving. He says: ‘Certainly in the years that I’ve been a Member of Parliament, I’ve seen a big change in the mix of the student body, and certainly at the Freshers’ Fair every year when I go up. You still get quite a strong contingent of young people from wealthy dependent schools but there’s also a much bigger cross-section, and also a much more international student body given the success that Exeter has had in attracting overseas students which again has helped it perform as a university, raised money and boosted the local economy.’ Those within the University seem to share Bradshaw’s opinion that opportunities are becoming more equally accessible. Hannah Barton, the Students’ Guild President, commented: ‘Is vital that universities continue to work towards equitable access to higher education for state school pupils. We have the Office of Fair Access that helps students from all backgrounds to access higher education, and there are targets set by HESA that help to incentivise this work.’

Attracting international students is no easy task given that they could end up paying as much as £35,000 for a year of study, in comparison with the £9,000 that British students now pay. But that, Bradshaw believes, is why they are so attractive as a source of income.

Bradshaw adds: ‘If you’re in a situation like Exeter University where you’re wanting to ensure that British youngsters who have got the talent and ability can go to university and not worry about the cost, and you want to provide bursaries and support for those people, and at the same time you’re facing government cuts, one of the ways that you can raise income is with foreign students, and don’t forget a lot of those foreign and overseas students will be coming on bursaries themselves from their home governments.’

Whether a home or international student, a common dilemma for any graduate is the growing prospect of unemployment. Bradshaw outlines the steps necessary to reduce unemployment: ‘The most important thing is to get the economy growing and get a proper industrial strategy in place where we’re investing in those areas – the environmental technologies, the creative industries and so forth, which will provide the well-paid graduate jobs for the future. That’s what the government needs to do.’

The issue of unemployment in recent years has stretched far beyond graduates. Between the months of May and July this year, 960,000 young people aged 16-24 were unemployed, and whilst overall unemployment may be dropping – which the Prime Minister calls ‘encouraging’ –  youth unemployment is on the rise.

‘There’s a particular problem at the moment. The number of young people in long-term unemployment has trebled in the last three years. Many of these people are people who don’t have very good qualifications, they may come from families where there’s a history of unemployment going back generations, and governments need to focus on them and boosting their skills.’

Ironically, it may be these forgotten and often overlooked individuals who will eventually bring about change, Bradshaw believes. ‘Because young people have been bearing the brunt of this government’s austerity policies… there is a renewed interest of young people in politics; wanting to get involved and make a difference.

‘I’ve never bought this idea that young people these days are apathetic or they’re cynical or they’re turned off politics… Certainly whenever I go around schools in Exeter or to the College or the University I find young people not only engaged but actually much better informed and better educated than I think they’ve ever been. Young people don’t always necessarily see a vehicle for their political activism or idealism through political parties; they often feel more comfortable in channeling their energy into charity work or single-issue organizations. I think again that’s a natural progression and a lot of people come to party politics through individual campaigns.’

Online Features Editors Meg Lawrence and Imogen Watson with Ben Bradshaw.
Image credits: Niklas Rahmel.

Exeter’s Students’ Guild President shares Bradshaw’s enthusiasm that young people are involved in politics. She says: ‘I think students are often engaged politically without even knowing it. Although they may not align themselves with a political party or political beliefs, by participating in any of the Guild’s democratic processes they are engaging in some way. I think this should be encouraged and we should continue to raise awareness of this so that students’ voices can be heard as much as possible.’

Certainly, Exeter University students don’t hesitate to be involved in campaigning and political organisation. The SOS (Save Our Streetlights) campaign has empowered students and raised awareness. On the issue, Bradshaw says: ‘I think the Devon County Council… needs to proceed very cautiously on this, and yes the students have run a very effective and I think justified campaign, not the least given some unfortunate incidents on women after dark which have happened on campus and off campus.

‘Good street lighting in areas where students are going to and from late at night is really important, not just for their safety but also for their sense of well-being. To be perfectly honest I cannot see that by switching off streetlights across Exeter that the County Council is going to be saving an awful lot of money, or an awful lot of carbon omissions. I can think of many better ways in which they can do that, so I hope they will listen to the concerns of students in Exeter and also listen to the concerns of Exeter City Council which is very worried about this.’

Ben Bradshaw’s interest in Exeter students is also apparent on a personal level. His internship scheme, open to Exeter students of politics and international relations, gives invaluable experience. He says: ‘I have been very lucky with the people who have come through the office… students have worked with me here in Westminster and also have shadowed me in the office in Exeter, getting an idea about what MPs do and how the political system works. I think they found that a valuable and worthwhile experience, and it’s always nice for me to have young people coming through the office. We tend to have volunteers and interns on a regular basis, and they’ve always got something new to bring.’

To contact Ben Bradshaw, or find out more about your local MP, follow this link.

Meg Lawrence, Online Features Editor

Comment at the Cross-Party Debate

With it being the first political debate of the new academic year, a high turnout greeted the 5 Presidents of the main political societies on campus for the cross-party debate. Exeposé Comment were at the event to deliver a report on the current state of the student political societies.

The first issue up for discussion was a previously agreed upon question concerning the economy: “Is the government cutting too much?”

President of the Freedom Society Liam Taylor began by asking where the cuts actually were; he claimed that this government’s ‘Right to Buy’ housing scheme would be detrimental to the economy, adding that these were the sort of schemes that had gotten us into the mess we are in now. President of Exeter Labour Students Dan Richards argued that borrowing has gone up under this government and the right can’t just keep blaming Labour for the situation today, pointing out that borrowing is forecast to be higher in the five years of this government than the whole 13 years under the previous regime. Harry Chamberlain, President of Exeter Conservative Future thought that the government had the balance of cuts about right but suggested that any more could potentially harm the recovery. Alex Whattam, President of Exeter Student Liberal Democrats seemed to imply that the cuts couldn’t be blamed for the poor economic performance – instead citing the problems in the Eurozone and that 51% of our exports are to EU countries. Carlus Hudson, co-President of Exeter Socialist Students began in rather a stereotypical fashion, quoting Karl Marx, much to the amusement of the audience. He went on to say that the problems we have today can be traced right back as far as 20-30 years ago and also agreed with Taylor that the ‘Right to buy’ scheme would do more harm than good.

“On some issues, there was a widespread consensus across the panel; when it came to discussing Syria all five panelists believed that not pressing ahead with military action was the right thing to have happened and that a diplomatic solution would be preferable and was now a distinct possibility.”
Photo Credit: Niklas Rahmel.

Early on, it was evident that all members of the panel were a bit nervous, which is understandable given the size of the audience. The situation was certainly not helped by the background discussions taking place in the audience and the numerous unhelpful and unintelligent heckles from the back of the room.

Harry Chamberlain came across as calm and unflustered throughout the debate without landing any major political blows. He appeared to be at his best when discussing the current state of the NHS – when presented with a suggestion that halving doctors pay could double the amount of doctors available, he rightfully pointed out that in order to attract high quality people, a higher salary is needed. After blaming Labour for borrowing too much in the good times, Chamberlain was left in a bit of a pickle when it was pointed out to him that the Conservatives had backed Labour’s spending plans right up until the beginning of the recession.

Carlus Hudson was one of the more engaging members of the panel, providing some conflict into an otherwise quite friendly debate. Despite being perhaps a little over the top on the rhetoric and the clichés, there is no doubt that he made some very interesting points. He launched a scathing attack of the European Union where he claimed the EU only serves the capitalist interests of big business and fails to act in the interest of the European population.

Representing Exeter Labour Students, Dan Richards was up against the wall with most of the panel disagreeing with him on most of the issues – it’s not easy being left-wing in Exeter! On the economy, he all but admitted that Ed Balls had been wrong and that austerity has worked. He gave a staunch defence of Labour’s time in government, rightfully pointing out that the economy was growing when Labour left office in 2010 and that borrowing is forecasted to rise more under this government than in the entire time under Labour. The fact that this point is correct but was greeted with vicious laughter from a hostile audience summed up his afternoon.

Nick Best, who attended the debate, said that, “The socialists and freedom representatives stood out. It’s surprising how much they had in common and agreed upon. I enjoyed the lively audience participation at times too. There are lots of freedom lovers around!”

Throughout the debate, Liam Taylor came across as being comfortable in his line of argument. He’d obviously done his research, presenting numerous facts and figures to try and prove his points. The “Liam mentions a Scandinavian country” tally stood at a disappointing 4 for this debate. He did have the advantage of not being tied to a major political party, enabling him to have more flexibility in his views. The proposals were great, but their pragmatism is another issue.

Overheard in the Moot Room: “Don’t you think Liam looks like a young Leonardo DiCaprio?”
Photo Credit: narice28 via Compfight cc and Liam Taylor.

President of Exeter Liberal Youth Alex Whattam had the most challenging afternoon out of the panel. It was always going to be a tough ask with his party in dire straits polling just 9% nationally in a recent YouGov poll. In true Lib Dem style, he sat on the fence on a number of the key issues such as the economy, health and foreign aid. Rather bizarrely, he left Dan Richards stranded on the issue of Europe, saying that it wouldn’t be that bad if Britain left and that we should have had a referendum sooner! Unfortunately Alex looked underprepared for the debate as arguably the most inexperienced member of the panel concerning this type of event.

On some issues, there was a widespread consensus across the panel; when it came to discussing Syria all five panelists believed that not pressing ahead with military action was the right thing  to have happened and that a diplomatic solution would be preferable and was now a distinct possibility. Rather curiously, as much as they would hate to admit it, Carlus Hudson of SocStu and Liam Taylor found themselves largely in agreement on a number of issues, such as the European Union, the ‘Right to Buy’ scheme and foreign aid.

An honourable mention should also go to Ellie Binks, who chaired the event. She made a good effort at establishing a level and tolerant forum for discussion and made some important decisions regarding the length of some panelists’ responses, some of which were even acknowledged. Hopefully this event will set a precedent for the year in terms of open-forum debate between members of all student political societies.

Dave Reynolds and James Bennett, Online Comment Editors.

Did you attend the cross-party debate? Did you see it differently from our analysis? If so, leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

The UKIP effect – the aftermath

William Cafferky discusses UKIP’s current political position, and where it could lead.

UKIP has risen from the ashes of European economic collapse – emerging as an increasingly formidable party political force in the UK. The slump of the single currency, and increased scrutiny of political decision makers in Brussels may provide obvious rationale behind the growth of anti-European parties both in a domestic and foreign capacity throughout the EU. However, national issues, rather than the struggles of the EU, perhaps best explain UKIP’s success.

Image credit: Jennifer Jane Mills

UKIP is anti-systemic, and it is within this role that it maybe garners most of its support. Since the controversy of the Thatcher era, the Conservatives have preached a message of compassion and pragmatism. It epitomized the evolution of UK party politics from grass-roots polarized ideologies towards centrist pragmatism.

Under John Major, and now under Cameron, the Conservative party finds itself divided. Some feel that the party has strayed too far from its right-wing heritage, increasingly becoming merely a cog in the political machine. UKIP has presented apathetic Tory voters with an opportunity to jump ship. Their hardline anti-immigration policies, socially conservative and nationalist policies embody Thatcherite politics.

It was arguably merely a matter of time until the squeezed middle of party politics produced an extremist ideological party. UKIP itself hasn’t really had to fight too hard for electoral success. Nonetheless, the party faces a defining moment in its political history come the 2015 general election. Should Farage climb eagerly in to bed with Cameron in a new coalition, he runs the risk of his party fading into the back benches.

Conversely, should UKIP shy away from coalition, there’s a high chance their populist bubble could burst, and the party could fade into the background. Whilst the country may be divided over its European membership, as previously mentioned, this isn’t in fact the defining component of UKIP’s success.

What sets UKIP apart from the 3 main parties is decisiveness. Whilst their goals are questionable there is no denying their existence. Whilst Milliband, Cameron and Clegg find themselves in a perpetual u-turn on significant policy issues, UKIP is defiantly anti-state, anti-EU, anti-immigration and anti-tax.

Ultimately the growth of UKIP is a worrying sight for Labour and Socialists alike. Comparisons between UKIP and the BNP are perhaps exaggerated, however the reality is almost equally harrowing. Parties such as UKIP perpetuate the myth that immigration is the greatest villain in the war on unemployment. Furthermore, whilst many have bemoaned the coalitions attack on the welfare state, in reality it pales in significance next to the prospect of UKIP-Conservative coalition. Such a government could signal the end of the NHS in its current format, and a return to the hierarchical Thatcherite policies that were arguably to blame for the recent collapse of the banks, and the alienation of the poorer members of society.

This is a somewhat apocalyptic forecast, which is arguably exaggerated and undoubtedly subjective. Regardless of the supposed progress, the UKIP party is still very much in its infancy. There is a distinct possibility that it may suffer the same fate as “Cleggomania” and underperform at the general election. Furthermore, even if it gains more than twenty seats, coalition may ultimately damage the party’s anti-systemic reputation.

There are multiple hoops for Farage and his followers to jump through in the path to the political main stage. The greatest hope for the political left is that they fall before they reach there. Regardless of political allegiance however, UKIP currently presents us with a genuine challenge to the status quo of mainstream politics. It is impossible to presently predict whether the party will spread its proverbial wings, or return to the ashes of mediocrity.

William Cafferky

Aftermath of the Council Elections: the State of the Parties

Following the recent Council Elections, online comment editor Dave Reynolds assesses the position of the key political parties, and their standing for the General Election in 2015.

With more than 2300 county seats up for grabs across England, recent Council Election results leave the main political parties with much to ponder, with the General Election in 2015 fast approaching. The Conservatives lost well over 300 seats across England and see their nationwide support down at about 32% in Yougov polls. This is largely down to some typical Conservative voters turning to the Nigel Farage party (aka UKIP).

Many say that the Conservatives should take UKIP seriously, but I believe that Tories currently voting for UKIP out of protest will come home to the party in time for the general election in 2015 and support for UKIP will dwindle. Farage will still be happier than he was at the 2010 Election; he will have a higher vote share and possibly a seat in parliament, as long as he doesn’t crash his plane again! Despite making small gains across England in the county council elections, Labour need to do far more to appeal to the ‘working man’ if they have any plans of governing in 2015.

Image Credits- BBC

The Conservatives are faced with a very difficult dilemma. Should Cameron seek a more right wing agenda and take a tougher stance on immigration, EU and law an order in an attempt to lure dissatisfied voters back from UKIP? That is what he is doing. But I believe it is the wrong way to go.

We shouldn’t be listening to UKIP. These angry Tories seeking to protest in a mid-term election will come back to the Conservatives at the general election as they will come to their senses and see that a split right will pave the way for Ed Miliband and the Labour Party to walk back into power. David Cameron needs to stick to the ‘modernising’ plan he had when first elected leader of the Conservatives in 2005.  In order to win the 2015 election he needs to be wooing voters on the centre ground, not concentrating on the far right. They will come back to you, Dave!

Looking at the Labour Party, all economic indicators suggest they should be way ahead in the polls. With growth flat-lining, living standards falling and inequality in the UK at an all-time high, Ed Miliband should be preparing his victory speech for 2015. But unfortunately, he has not been brave enough to really say anything. Nobody knows what his economic plan is. While a fiscal stimulus (for example a VAT cut or an increase in government spending on infrastructure) is a credible option, he is too afraid to say it as he fears admitting to more borrowing would be political suicide. It wouldn’t even necessarily increase the budget deficit.

We’re spending so much money on welfare because unemployment is still stubbornly high, a fiscal stimulus that gets more people into work would obviously cut welfare payments as unemployment will fall and tax receipts would rise. But he’s too afraid to admit the deficit would rise in the short run. I can’t imagine that global markets really care if our debt is 1.3 trillion or 1.4 trillion. The numbers are beyond belief anyway! It’s growth that we need and in the short run, we just have to take that risk on the deficit. A fresh economic approach is needed for the Labour Party and this could be made by removing Ed Balls as Shadow Chancellor and bringing in the former Chancellor Alistair Darling – the man who arguably saved us from a depression.

With the two main parties both failing to take the initiative, another hung parliament looks the most likely outcome of the 2015 General Election. Therefore, the party who can be most confident of being in the next government is the Liberal Democrats, despite a massive drop in popularity due to the broken promise on abolishing tuition fees and no longer being a protest vote. All in all, these council election results are going to be depressing for all three of the main parties. It’s time for all of them to up their game.

Dave Reynolds, Online Comment Editor

Devon County Council election results announced

Turnout at the election was only 32.9 percent. Image credit: BBC

The Devon County Council election results have been announced this afternoon, with the Conservatives retaining overall control of the body. Of the nine Exeter wards, seven were claimed by Labour.

Across the county 313 candidates were fighting for 62 seats, with the Tories winning 38. Labour did not add any seats to their seven in Exeter, as UKIP won four, the Greens one and three independents were elected.

Neither Labour nor UKIP could gain the Conservative held University ward, Duryard & Pennsylvania, which was won by Percy Prowse with a 21 percent majority over second placed Labour.

St David’s & St James, home to a large proportion of Exeter students, was won by Labour’s Jill Owen.

Both areas suffered from low turnout – around 10 percent below the lowly 33 percent average, which was down from 44 percent in 2009.

The coalition parties both registered overall losses, with three less Conservatives and four less Lib Dem councillors being elected.

The election results will be viewed by some as a reflection on national politics, with Liberal Democrat ratings in opinions polls remaining at low levels, in contrast to the recent rise of UKIP.

A referendum in the Exeter St James area asking: “Do you want Exeter City Council to use the neighbourhood plan for Exeter St James to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?” was emphatically accepted, with 92 % voting yes.

James Roberts and Carlus Hudson were amongst a number of University students standing in the election, but neither were elected.

Roberts came in fifth place for the Conservatives in the St David’s & St James area, whilst Hudson polled only 29 votes in Newtown & Polsloe.

To find out who your local councillor is, click here.

Harrison Jones, Online News Editor

Follow @Exepose News on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

Spotlight on the Labour Party

Photo Credits: BBC

Following Tony Blair’s warning to Ed Miliband to not repeat the Labour Party’s mistakes of the 1980s, James Crouch discusses their  policy dilemma.

The spotlight has now centred its glare on Labour Party policy. For years we have all taken for granted that the Opposition can carry on with simple Disraeli-style tactics, where constant attempts are made to derail the Government’s agenda at every turn long before any effort is made to create an alternative vision. Now that vision is what we want to know about.

Labour has had a clear lead in the opinion polls for years now, and one does have to think what would happen if Labour actually won the next general election. The only problem is, have even the Labour Party thought what would happen if they won?

The problem for Labour is that we are now in a period of almost unparalleled dominance of right-wing sentiments, if not strictly speaking ideas.  The feeling against immigration has not just grown since the millennium, but now has become tantamount to a national doctrine. Criticism of the Conservative immigration policy on the ground is never in terms of its strictness or unfairness, but out of complaints that it won’t do the job.

On benefits, although the public is divided, there are enough people who are so single-mindedly furious over benefits cheats that the reduction of the welfare bill is controversial only amongst Guardian and Independent columnists and those actually on the bottom of the benefits rung.

Europe is perhaps an even more perfect example. In 2001, Hague was devalued by his Save the Pound campaign – and looking back at that time, it was a complete embarrassment. But if the same campaign was launched in 2013 I bet Labour’s majority wouldn’t have been 160. We now have an openly eurosceptic party trying to rein in the public’s europhobia, rather than the other way around.

We have had years of tabloid front pages that have peddled populist right-wing mantras, and now, the public has not just moulded to it, it has outdone them. Even on the cuts, the public are on side. Much could be made of constant polls which show the public think the cuts, on balance, quite unfair – and indeed those on the left could use that to say that Labour can commit to reversing cuts. But anyone sensible will also see that these same people, in the same opinion polls, will answer that the cuts are unfair, but that they support them regardless. That should be worrying for those on the left.

In fact, outside of Labour’s opinion poll lead, there is nothing of substance which the public supports them on. Every single question of “what do you think of this?”, “do you support this?”, “would you rather this to that?” finds for the most part in the Government’s favour every time.  Even during the omnishambles period Cameron & Osborne’s rating on economic confidence led Miliband & Balls – and since this year’s budget that lead is back on the up. Even Osborne’s poor ratings bottomed out and is now rising (however slowly).

Labour has little to no leeway on this. Thus far, it seems that Labour’s only winning plan could be to accept in principle the vast majority the Coalition Government is doing and tweak it. Blair is right. If Labour decides to try and intellectualise and commit itself in policy terms to reversing the cuts, benefit changes and other government policies, it will become a party only for protest votes. The public are divided, but it’s clear which side of the fence more of them stand, and a wholesale rejection of present policies will put Labour on the wrong side of that fence.

However, where Blair seems to be wrong, is that the acceptance of these things will give Labour victory. Blair seems to summarise the public’s thoughts as being a lack of a shift to the left. I would claim that there has been a shift, and it’s to the right. Labour’s best option is to pick the policy which accepts most of the Government’s changes, but at the end of the day the public won’t vote for a party which is simply a moderately nicer version of the one it already has in power. I believe that Labour can do nothing to win the election this time round. Politics needs to move on to other things before Labour can really regain a connection between it and the British electorate. Until that time, the only thing more right-wing than the Tories on the great issues of the day, is the British voters.

James Crouch

UKIP: Filling the Void and Here to Stay

President of The Freedom Society Liam Taylor and Conservative Future member Nick Best put forward the case for why UKIP’s recent surge in popularity is more than a protest vote, and in fact makes them a major force in British politics. Here are Liam’s thoughts first, followed by Nick’s.

One of the most intriguing recent developments in British politics has been the surprising rise of UKIP. But just how has this party that just 2½ years ago only polled 3%, and indeed was so minor that the current Prime Minister felt comfortable dismissing them as “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists”, rocketed to 17% in recent national polls?

One obvious answer is the popularity of their leader Nigel Farage. In an age when people are getting fed up of artificial, image conscious, style-over-substance politicians who change their minds according to the whims of the latest focus group, the charismatic, straight-talking Mr Farage is a welcome breath of fresh air. The chain-smoking Farage strikes most people as a normal person, unlike the career politicians who seem so interchangeable that they could have all rolled off the same assembly line, and his German wife and bilingual children make the accusations of racism and xenophobia hard to stick.

But the reasons for UKIP’s rise run deeper than their leader’s personality; it is fundamentally an inevitable result of the disillusionment of the electorate with the main three parties over key issues, chiefly the EU and immigration. For years, hard-working people have had legitimate concerns over these issues, whether it’s concerns for their own job security or over the capability of their local hospitals and schools to deal with the extra pressures consequently put on them. But not only were their concerns ignored but they were insulted, slandered as racist or xenophobic when raised.

Does UKIP offer a substantial difference from the main three political parties?
Photo Credit: themostinept via Compfight cc

This is all only partly why people feel so disillusioned with all of the main parties, all three just seem too out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people. The Conservatives are seen to be a posh-boy’s club, more concerned with insulting their core voters than running the country and obsessed with the fads of the Notting Hill metropolitan elite. Meanwhile, Labour are seen to be not so much the party of the working class anymore as the party of the non-working class, and just as obsessed with the latest fads of the metropolitan elite, only the one in Islington instead. As for the Lib Dem’s, the traditional party of protest, only time will tell if their voters will ever forgive them for selling out their principals in exchange for a botched AV referendum (or a “miserable little compromise” as Nick Clegg called it before the election), but at only 8% in the polls it doesn’t look promising for them. This is why UKIP is able to steal votes from all three parties, drawing the majority of its support from a mixture of traditional Thatcherite Tories, socially conservative working class Old Labourites, young libertarians and general protest voters, some of whom haven’t voted at all for quite some time.

So are UKIP just a glorified single-issue pressure group? Two years ago it wouldn’t have been unreasonable to say they were, an EU Referendum promise would have almost certainly been enough to see their limited support evaporate. But not anymore. UKIP is a completely different animal now, drawing support for a wider range of reasons. This is why Cameron’s referendum promise has failed to dent their rise in support, not to mention the fact that after his “cast iron guarantee” before the last election crumbled into a pile of rust most Eurosceptics simply don’t trust him to deliver anymore.

So are UKIP just a protest vote whose support will evaporate come election time? Yes and no. For most voters they are still just a means to an end, a way to express anger and try to scare the main parties into addressing their concerns by costing them valuable votes. But if their concerns aren’t addressed soon there is a danger to the main three parties of UKIP becoming an end in itself.  So it may be largely a protest vote but that doesn’t mean that their support will disappear come election time. As Beppe Grillo, the comedian turned anti-politician politician, showed in Italy, when voters are angry enough they like to give their political leaders a good kicking.

Liam Taylor

Conservative Future Member Nick Best outlines why he thinks that, “UKIP appears to be changing the political landscape”, and moreover why this is a good thing.

UKIP are the party of the moment but will this continue and grow into further electoral success? This is impossible to answer for sure but things looks positive for Farage’s party.  The party activists are highly motivated and their common sense and populist policies find favour with a large number of main party supporters and even people who haven’t voted for 20 years.  UKIP appears to be changing the political landscape and I for one welcome that.  The three main Westminster parties, 2 in coalition and the other in opposition, have shown themselves time and time again to be out of touch with ordinary hardworking people and have failed to represent the views of the electorate on so many issues.  Nigel Farage and UKIP have emerged from this environment offering a very different message; they are straight talking and conviction politicians, something that is rare in modern politics. Whatever your view of their policies at least they actually believe in them and don’t change course just because of a focus group or bad press.

Will UKIP be able to secure any seats in the 2015 general elections?
Photo Credit: andy linden via Compfight cc

Some question whether UKIP’s rise is just temporary and suggest that they attract protest votes. Whilst some of their voters might be looking to protest many are committed to UKIP and will not be returning to the other Westminster parties. We will have to watch the local elections, next year’s European elections and the 2015 general election to see what happens but my guess is that UKIP will continue to do well and will win many council seats, could come first in the European elections and have a good chance of getting into Parliament. That would be a real shock to the older parties and if it teaches them that representing real voters and their opinions is successful then that can only be a good thing.

The other main criticism is that they are a one man band, that without Nigel Farage they would not be as successful. This is probably partly true and I recognise UKIP need to push out their other members and spokesmen, but it is policies that matter. Besides, can ordinary voters tell you who the entire Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet are? I doubt it! Many of the attacks on UKIP can be sourced to the existing dominant parties who are very worried by the prospect of a rising UKIP. These attacks reveal that Cameron and others are scared to debate with UKIP and so have resorted to name calling and bullying tactics. Luckily, more and more people are looking at UKIP and are liking what they see. They see a party that is made up of ordinary people who have had jobs outside politics, people who are in politics to change things and not to gain power and prestige, and policies which normal people outside the political elite believe in and want to see enacted. We should not be afraid of a new party in British politics and whether you like them or not you cannot deny that they represent many people in this country and deserve a place in the major league of British politics.

Nick Best

For the case made against UKIP be sure to read This isn’t the protest vote you’re looking for: Why we should say no to UKIP. Does UKIP represent a real choice for the disillusioned voter? Or are they benefitting from a short term protest vote windfall? Give a reply below or post your comment to the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group.