Other impressions of the Fabian Conference

I thought there was a good spread of ages at the Fabian conference. I think that there were Young Fabians in evidence enjoying the chance to hear from M.P.s and working economists and experts and there seemed to be about 20 percent of white-haired Fabians, some very old, who must have been going to these things for years and years. Amazing.

I enjoyed the plenary on "Does the Left now have the ideological momentum?" I was particularly taken with the straight -talking Wes Streeting M.P. for Ilford North - a spokesman for keeping the UK within the single market and the customs union. His point of view was very popular with the audience. He said a clearer Labour standpoint on Europe would influence policy (I agree) although the current very ambiguous stand on Europe is popular on "the doorstep" (whatever the voter says, the Labour politician agrees with them). Richard Burgon M.P. said that the country has been suffering from the failure to share the country's wealth equally. Of course, this is particularly evident in the North/South East divide. No country is so geographically economically divided as ours and this is simply not being addressed. Polly Toynbee pointed out some of the pernicious effects of austerity. Katy Balls said that young people are pro-Labour on the whole, but didn't like the Mayor's call on Uber - because Uber is part of the young person's lifestyle. It caused outrage! She made many more points but she didn't try to speak very clearly so the effort of understanding her mannered way of talking became too much for me. Polly Toynbee said that if 16-18 year olds got the vote politicians would have to campaign in 6th forms and young people would get a fairer share of the cake, and more of the things they need, and therefore this age group should get the vote. (A good point).

After this plenary I was tired and went to have lunch in the café, where there is also a bookshop. It was a bright café and bookshop but not very warm.

I then attended a session, organised by the Young Fabians on Global-ready Britain: Taking stock as we go it alone.

There was much discussion about the education in this country - a poor skills base, poor lifelong learning, training in work confined to health and safety and the induction. Nothing else, most of the time. Bad management skills. Our economic vulnerabilities are social vulnerabilities and vice versa. If your education system produces people who are badly skilled and can do little, this is socially a time bomb (dissatisfaction leading to identity politics - British and proud of it - nothing else to be proud of but this accident of birth) and it is also economically rock-bottom.

Vicky Pryce talked at this conference and I heard her twice, without rating her highly as a speaker - her thoughts seemed to be all jumbled together - and her points very unclear.

There was a good woman Shadow Treasury Minister - Anneliese Dodds - very good intelligent speaker. Michael Jacobs was very good, very well-informed.

Later there was a talk by Keir Starmer M.P. He was a revelation to me because I had no idea he was such a good speaker, so confident, so clear. When I got home I looked him up and discovered that he has had a very successful career as a barrister and used to be the Director of Public Prosecutions. In fact, he was responsible for deciding to prosecute Vicky Pryce and her then husband, Chris Hahn, and they were sent to prison. Have they met since, I wondered? Anyway, he has also been knighted and is Sir Keir Starmer. He is the Labour shadow minister for Brexit and I have to say he must be a lot more intelligent than the Tory team. Sadly I didn't take any notes, and I can't remember what was said, except the level of the Tory incompetence is very high, e.g. the story of the excruciatingly detailed economic impact assessments that don't exist. Bad, very bad, as D. Trump would say.

Labour would be far better for the country than the Tories. They are move positive thinkers and care about the people; those people who don't have money in shares, trusts and funds. That's most of us. When people vote, they think the Tories know more about the economy because they are rich, so they vote for them. This is ridiculous. The Tories want to screw down wages so that only share owners will benefit.

Two nations - and more

Benjamin Disraeli wrote a novel which I haven't read, but I will, called Sybil, or The Two Nations, and this is the most famous quotation (never "quote" please, girls!) from it.

Two nations between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other's habits, thoughts, and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets. The rich and the poor.
 

Well, now we know, don't we! In this country it's the educated and the uneducated, and it's the same; we don't know each other. We hardly visit each other's websites - even though it's easy to do so - because they are so unattractive each to the other. I accidentally went to a website called Right Lad and I was really disgusted by it - jeering hatred of a tearful liberal woman. ("Her period will stop and she'll forget all about it.") And this is triumphalism, which they are good at (not that they know the word) because they have won the referendum. The level of their comments ranges from "Suck it up you whining bastards" to "Don't you get it, losers, it's a democracy!"

At present the situation which most worries me is the potential for a split between Scotland and England - another two nations. This is such a small island that to break it apart makes no sense at all, except for the Europe question. Oh God, Oh God, Oh God, that this thing had to happen at all. How gloriously happy and blinkered we have been. Of course, often when I wrote about my life I said we were lucky and that many people in the U.K. are not so lucky, and I jeered at myself in a way, because I am not entirely unfeeling about that.

London voted to remain - in large numbers - and they are pretty angry with the situation. London is interesting. It is becoming politically active. It supports Jeremy Corbyn, whose parliamentary party is trying to oust him as leader - resigning in huge numbers - really with no reason as most (62%) Labour supported voted to remain, the same as Nicola Sturgeon's Scottish Nationalists. There is another binary split between the lefties outside parliament (pro Corbyn) and those inside (anti Corbyn) and why on earth should those inside entirely ignore the wishes of those outside whom they are supposed to represent? Anyway, a mob came out to show their support of Corbyn on Wednesday. The London mob! It hasn't been seen for centuries.

Parliament Square, Wednesday

Sadly, not so many at his last meeting yesterday in Bloomsbury.

The reason why all these people support him is because he is not at all glossy and tailored; he can't be bothered about his image; he is just himself - a conviction politician who has been active all his life for the things he believes in - veteran of anti -apartheid, anti- nuclear protests; you can go back decades and see him protesting. When you look at the last Labour leader, Ed Miliband, you can appreciate the difference. He was part of the political machine - he lived and breathed Westminster - it was very hard to identify with him because he was such a rarefied species. I never felt he'd been to anything like a protest where he might have to rub shoulders with the common people! For me, he was Blair's man, so I loathed him the way I loathed Tony Blair.

Of course, Miliband has said that Corbyn should resign!

In the Tory party there is also a great deal of infighting as they try to decide who will take the leadership from Cameron. If it is Boris Johnson he will split the party as he is not respected or trusted; he doesn't seem to have convictions and he has not served much time as an MP. When he was an MP he did it part-time as he was still a journalist, and was editing the Spectator at the same time. He delegated his MP work to some secretary. Not much commitment, then, no time to make connections or to form judgments of his fellow Tories. However, the people seem to warm to him. They think he is a real Union flag, Brexit man like themselves, who wants to close the borders (he doesn't).

Some people want Theresa May, who is a natural successor to Cameron, but she was in the Remain side and some people say the new leader must be someone who was in the Leave side. (Theresa May has no moral scruples. There was a programme on Parliament and it showed her pushing through an important piece of legislation by tabling it at short notice at the end of the day so there was no time for a debate on it. She swept in with her acolytes and looked like an Empress with her courtiers. She didn't look as though it had occurred to her to represent anyone but herself and her own glory.) Well, the Tories will like that, I suppose.

Another thing about Corbyn is that he does want to represent the ordinary man who voted for him. I don't think this is laughable. I think he correctly understands his function!

When I see Owen Jones trying to be brave and encouraging us all to make plans for the future, I still feel terribly sad, and reading all the comments I see that everyone else feels the same. We are like headless chickens.