Babies and bathwater. Photo:Getty
Show Hide image

It's not just enough to "listen" to young people. They have to be respected, too

We need to reach for a more authentic, localised politics, in the wake of the Spad era, rather than just revert to the days of pinstripes and tweed. As the faux warts ‘n’ all allure of Ukip shows, there’s a danger of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

This week I received a letter saying I had “no experience of the real world”. It came courtesy of my Conservative opponent in South Thanet (the three-way marginal where I’m the Labour candidate) and was a reference to the fact I am – shock horror – aged 25.

Having repeatedly been referred to by the candidate in question as “the Labour boy”, reading that I had no life experience did not cause the hours of existential soul-searching it might have. But it is frustrating, as a married father of two, that opponents still try to use my age as a stick to beat me with. Imagine, for a second, a younger candidate playing the age card in reverse, by attacking a 65 year-old as “world weary and beset with health problems”. There would rightly be hell to pay!

Were I up against an ex-Archbishop or prize-winning economist then there might be pause for thought. But my two opponents are a stockbroker cum truant MEP (a certain Mr Farage) and a tax avoidance expert who has run for office nine times – including five times for Ukip before defecting to the Conservatives. “Life experience”, it would seem, can only be acquired in the corridors of high finance or the chapels of Euroscepticism.

The last few years have seen the public reject machine politics, and with it the class of career politicians who move from Oxbridge to Westminster without encountering real life. But we need to reach for a more authentic, localised politics, in the wake of the Spad era, rather than just revert to the days of pinstripes and tweed. As the faux warts ‘n’ all allure of Ukip shows, there’s a danger of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

I should add that this is not a party political issue, and I don’t doubt there’s a young Tory candidate somewhere being demeaned by a Labour silverback. It’s about the fact that my generation has been on the sharp end of the recession, and we deserve a stake in decisions.

Rick Edwards, campaigner on this issue and author of None of the Above, points out the importance of younger candidates in reaching younger voters, saying “it helps if you can see people in power who are a bit like you”. As it is under-30s are still humoured too much and respected too little, with the result that the old-style politics of dogma persists. And while “engaging young people” may be a buzz-phrase politicians are happy to use in the media, it can ring hollow on the campaign trail.

Getty
Show Hide image

Is defeat in Stoke the beginning of the end for Paul Nuttall?

The Ukip leader was his party's unity candidate. But after his defeat in Stoke, the old divisions are beginning to show again

In a speech to Ukip’s spring conference in Bolton on February 17, the party’s once and probably future leader Nigel Farage laid down the gauntlet for his successor, Paul Nuttall. Stoke’s by-election was “fundamental” to the future of the party – and Nuttall had to win.
 
One week on, Nuttall has failed that test miserably and thrown the fundamental questions hanging over Ukip’s future into harsh relief. 

For all his bullish talk of supplanting Labour in its industrial heartlands, the Ukip leader only managed to increase the party’s vote share by 2.2 percentage points on 2015. This paltry increase came despite Stoke’s 70 per cent Brexit majority, and a media narrative that was, until the revelations around Nuttall and Hillsborough, talking the party’s chances up.
 
So what now for Nuttall? There is, for the time being, little chance of him resigning – and, in truth, few inside Ukip expected him to win. Nuttall was relying on two well-rehearsed lines as get-out-of-jail free cards very early on in the campaign. 

The first was that the seat was a lowly 72 on Ukip’s target list. The second was that he had been leader of party whose image had been tarnished by infighting both figurative and literal for all of 12 weeks – the real work of his project had yet to begin. 

The chances of that project ever succeeding were modest at the very best. After yesterday’s defeat, it looks even more unlikely. Nuttall had originally stated his intention to run in the likely by-election in Leigh, Greater Manchester, when Andy Burnham wins the Greater Manchester metro mayoralty as is expected in May (Wigan, the borough of which Leigh is part, voted 64 per cent for Brexit).

If he goes ahead and stands – which he may well do – he will have to overturn a Labour majority of over 14,000. That, even before the unedifying row over the veracity of his Hillsborough recollections, was always going to be a big challenge. If he goes for it and loses, his leadership – predicated as it is on his supposed ability to win votes in the north - will be dead in the water. 

Nuttall is not entirely to blame, but he is a big part of Ukip’s problem. I visited Stoke the day before The Guardian published its initial report on Nuttall’s Hillsborough claims, and even then Nuttall’s campaign manager admitted that he was unlikely to convince the “hard core” of Conservative voters to back him. 

There are manifold reasons for this, but chief among them is that Nuttall, despite his newfound love of tweed, is no Nigel Farage. Not only does he lack his name recognition and box office appeal, but the sad truth is that the Tory voters Ukip need to attract are much less likely to vote for a party led by a Scouser whose platform consists of reassuring working-class voters their NHS and benefits are safe.
 
It is Farage and his allies – most notably the party’s main donor Arron Banks – who hold the most power over Nuttall’s future. Banks, who Nuttall publicly disowned as a non-member after he said he was “sick to death” of people “milking” the Hillsborough disaster, said on the eve of the Stoke poll that Ukip had to “remain radical” if it wanted to keep receiving his money. Farage himself has said the party’s campaign ought to have been “clearer” on immigration. 

Senior party figures are already briefing against Nuttall and his team in the Telegraph, whose proprietors are chummy with the beer-swilling Farage-Banks axis. They deride him for his efforts to turn Ukip into “NiceKip” or “Nukip” in order to appeal to more women voters, and for the heavy-handedness of his pitch to Labour voters (“There were times when I wondered whether I’ve got a purple rosette or a red one on”, one told the paper). 

It is Nuttall’s policy advisers - the anti-Farage awkward squad of Suzanne Evans, MEP Patrick O’Flynn (who famously branded Farage "snarling, thin-skinned and aggressive") and former leadership candidate Lisa Duffy – come in for the harshest criticism. Herein lies the leader's almost impossible task. Despite having pitched to members as a unity candidate, the two sides’ visions for Ukip are irreconcilable – one urges him to emulate Trump (who Nuttall says he would not have voted for), and the other urges a more moderate tack. 

Endorsing his leader on Question Time last night, Ukip’s sole MP Douglas Carswell blamed the legacy of the party’s Tea Party-inspired 2015 general election campaign, which saw Farage complain about foreigners with HIV using the NHS in ITV’s leaders debate, for the party’s poor performance in Stoke. Others, such as MEP Bill Etheridge, say precisely the opposite – that Nuttall must be more like Farage. 

Neither side has yet called for Nuttall’s head. He insists he is “not going anywhere”. With his febrile party no stranger to abortive coup and counter-coup, he is unlikely to be the one who has the final say.