I am a Social Democrat: Reflections on the NZLP Conference

I joined the Labour Party in 1997 because I am a social democrat. I believe that a more human society, one that is better for everyone, is a more equal one: more equal in incomes, more equal in wealth, more equal in power and opportunity and self-respect. Equality is the distinguishing characteristic of social democracy.

Liberalism is not social democracy, but the social democratic project of necessity includes much of the liberal project. A key component of liberalism is the abolition of social inequalities, whether these are racially based, gender based, religiously based, or on one's sexuality, or intelligence, or weight, or whatever.

We believe people are equal as moral beings, and so they deserve not to be discriminated against because of characteristics they have.

And we believe we build a more equal - and a more moral - society when we stand for social and economic equality.

Why do I start a post about the Labour Party's 93rd Annual Conference with that? It's simple, really. The public formed the view in Labour's third term that Labour didn't care about the essence of the social democratic project. The public thought that we had become a mix of social libertarian extremists on the one hand, and bossy boots know-it-alls on the other.

That perception combined with (and partly heightened by) errors of political management and a slowing economy are key components of why Labour lost the last election.

What the first Conference with Phil Goff as leader had to do was reset expectations. It had to break through that public perception and give the party space to be potentially seen as something else.  Given the way the media works and the limited attention that Labour is getting, the message could not be a subtle one.

So, we said sorry. Personally, I am sorry. I am sorry that people thought we had our eye off the ball. I am sorry that our economic agenda didn't end up being bold enough and visible enough to captivate people. I am sorry that we as a party didn't manage ourselves in a way that people thought was good enough. I am sorry that the way we did electoral law reform was not inclusive and was more concerned with a parliamentary majority than it was with building a community consensus about the need for change. I was and remain sorry about what we did with the Foreshore and Seabed stuff a few years ago.

I'm proud that Phil and the other speakers grabbed this issue by the horns.

I'm also proud that all of us stand for a liberal and social democratic party. One that does want to open up more freedom and less discrimination for people. One that wants to make society more prosperous and more caring. Labour isn't backing away from a liberal agenda, though it will no doubt never be as ready to impose things on people (which are two very different things that got conflated in "nanny state"). But Labour's focus is and will be more visibly on the traditional concerns of our party and movement.

I think that's as it should be. I hope that as we keep working on those issues, putting our focus on those that matter most to people, any lingering perceptions of us as being obsessed with other issues will fade.

Readers need to understand that our own perception of what we were doing, at least from my standpoint, was not the picture that I painted and for which we've said we apologise. We thought we were focusing on people's concerns. The liberal agenda was not the core of what I spent most time thinking about and working for. 

But as Phil and others have said - the voters are right. Our perception of what we're doing does not matter, because we are not millions of Kiwis who decide the kind of society we want. We're only a tiny subset. 

Apologies are not fun. But this one had to be made and it was right to do it. Just as we were right at Conference to celebrate the achievements of a brilliant government, with far-sighted leaders in Helen Clark and Michael Cullen who took our country to a richer, fairer and frankly better place than it would have been without our Fifth Labour Government. 

Just as we were right at Conference to focus on the future and the challenges Labour will face in shaping a fairer and more equal society next time we take office, which I hope will be in late 2011. 

It is hard to say how it feels to both acknowledge and agree with needing to say sorry, and on the other hand being pleased with the vast majority of what we did in office. But that's how I feel and I know there are many others in the Party who share that feeling.

The pledge we gave, through Phil's speech and in the conversations and the issues we had and debated at Conference, is to make sure we don't make the same mistakes again. We won't, and that's good for Labour and good for New Zealand.

Jordan

Comments

[Basil Emes]

Is Labour sorry about the Terrorism Suppression Act and its use on October 15th 2007? That was the last straw for me.

[Amanda]

Hear hear Jordan - great post and captures the mood of many in the Party and in wider communities. Onwards and upwards:)

[Clint Heine]

"a richer, fairer and frankly better place??"

WTF? You are joking right? Labour put NZ into recession 9 months before the rest of the world. You know what you say is wrong when people from countries supposedly poorer than NZ tell you they are better off there than NZ.

[Jordan Carter]

Clint - the numbers speak for themselves, and if you aren't familiar with them, go look at the Treasury website.

Amanda - cheers :)

Basil - Wasn't one of the things mentioned.

[mico santos]

nice piece

[George D]

That's what it looks like from the inside.

[Oliver]

Jordan, could you please explain how Labour is a social democratic party, citing examples from the previous Government? I am not talking about single instances of nationalisations or one-off policies, I am talking about a broad social democratic picture.

Cheers,
Oliver

[George D]

Oliver, don't bother, you're wasting your time.