Ed Miliband ditching the "command and control" politics of the New Labour years

He wants it to be all about grassroots, community campaigning.

There are a couple of interesting hints about Labour's strategy going into the 2015 general election in the Independent today. Andrew Grice secured what appears to have been a much-interrupted interview with Ed Miliband on a train to Carlisle, and the Labour leader was keen to put the focus on Labour's efforts at community organising and grassroots campaigning.

Miliband said:

It’s not just about winning elections… It’s about constructing a real political movement. It’s a change from machine politics to grassroots politics.

A seemingly bland bit of politician-speak, but Labour are also investing cash in this strategy - as Grice points out, by the end of this year, Labour will have employed 170 full-time organisers in its 106 target seats, who in turn will recruit and train volunteer organisers in time for the 2015 election.

There was also a mention for David Miliband's Movement for Change campaign group, which he set up in conjuntion with American political guru Arnie Graf. David may be off to New York, but it seems like his grassroots organisation is about to become pretty important to Labour as the party moves away from the centralised election strategies of the New Labour years.

As my colleague George Eaton's recent interview with American journalist Sasha Issenberg reveals, the more data you have on your potential voters, the more likely you are to be able to target your persuasive messages at them effectively. By getting more organisers and volunteers out on the doorstep early on in the election cycle, Labour should be able to collect information that will pay dividends when the polls open in two years' time.
 

Ed Miliband claims his "One Nation" message is cutting through. Photograph: Getty Images

Caroline Crampton is assistant editor of the New Statesman. She writes a weekly podcast column.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Free movement isn't free: the truth about EU immigration

The UK does not need to leave the single market to restrict European migration - it already can.

In the Brext negotiations, the government has unashamedly prioritised immigration control over the economy. The UK must leave the single market, ministers say, in order to restrict free movement. For decades, they lament, European immigration has been "uncontrolled", making it impossible to meet the government's target of reducing net migration to "tens of thousands" a year.

It's worth noting that non-EU immigration alone (which ministers can limit) remains more than ten times this level (owing to the economic benefits). But more importantly, liberals and conservatives alike talk of "free movement" as if it is entirely free - it isn't.

Though EU citizens are initially permitted to live in any member state, after three months they must prove that they are working (employed or self-employed), a registered student or have "sufficient resources" (savings or a pension) to support themselves and not be "a burden on the benefits system". Far from being unconditional, then, the right to free movement is highly qualified.

The irony is that the supposedly immigration-averse UK has never enforced these conditions. Even under Theresa May, the Home Office judged that the cost of recording entry and exit dates was too high. Since most EU migrants are employed (and contribute significantly more in taxes than they do in benefits), there was no economic incentive to do so.

For some Brexiteers, of course, a job is not adequate grounds for an immigrant to remain. But even beyond implementing existing law, there is potential for further reform of free movement - even within the single market.

As Nick Clegg recently noted, shortly after the referendum, "a number of senior EU figures" were exploring a possible trade-off: "a commitment by the UK to pursue the least economically disruptive Brexit by maintaining participation in the single market and customs union, in return for a commitment to the reform of freedom of movement, including an 'emergency brake' on unusually high levels of intra-EU immigration." Liechtenstein, a member of the single market, has recently imposed quotas on EU migrants.

Yet with some exceptions, these facts are rarely heard in British political debate. Many Labour MPs, like their Conservative counterparts, support single market withdrawal to end free movement. The unheard truth that it isn't "free" could yet lead the UK to commit an avoidable act of economic self-harm.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

0800 7318496