Labour leader Ed Miliband took part in a weekend question and answer session with approximately 80 women at the National Media Museum organised by the Bradford Muslim Women's Council. JUST West Yorkshire's Director Ratna Lachman was there and here are her reflections.
The nature of the uphill struggle that Labour faces in retaining its northern heartlands clearly emerged over a lunchtime tête-à-tête with the party leader - an event aimed at understanding why Labour lost its safe seat of Bradford West to the Respect candidate George Galloway. It quickly became clear that Labour's problem stems from the disconnect between its national and local structures.
The sight of Miliband sans jacket and with rolled-up shirtsleeves presenting himself as a man of the people willing to 'listen and learn' was refreshing in an era where politicians have an inflated sense of their own importance – swanning in to meetings with the press, media and a political entourage in tow and swanning-out just as quickly to the next 'must-be-at' important engagement leaving the audience feeling used and abused.
The pity is that he wasn't flanked by local Labour councillors, seeking like him to understand where Labour got it wrong at both the by-election and the subsequent local elections in May, which saw it lose five seats to Respect Party candidates, including that of Bradford council's former leader.
As Ed Miliband responded to questions, his manner was engaging, even beguiling: he agreed with concerns around a whole range of issues- the impact of austerity on the vulnerable; the greed of the bankers; the coalition's socially unjust policies in relation to education, legal aid cuts and the National Health Service. These arguments had obviously been well-rehearsed and intended to appeal to just such an audience.
However when it came to the vexed question of why Labour lost Bradford West, he was on a less firm footing. His failure to grasp the central role of the tiny political cogs that operate the giant Labour machine at the grassroots level became quickly apparent. Labour's mistake (as with all mainstream parties) was to believe the rhetoric that Islam and democracy are antithetical values and the terms of democratic engagement therefore require a different approach. In Bradford's case this translated into supporting political candidates who promised to deliver Muslim clan votes - the 'Biraderi' system of patriarchal political patronage.
It would be wrong to assume that political nepotism is particular to Asian culture, as the system of old schoolboys' networks that much of the present political establishment exploits, taps into the same political psyche. However the problem with subverting democracy is that in the end it always demands a heavy price. In Bradford, Labour ignored the emergence of a new political constituency of Muslim women and young people who were beginning to flex their political muscles and found that the old clan politics had nothing to say to them. Ed Miliband acknowledged that voters had become disillusioned with politicians and it was a source of great pain to him to witness political disengagement at a time when people were dying for democracy in far away lands.
Yes Labour had miscalculated, he acknowledged, and their candidate Imran Hussain's failure to participate in the cut and thrust of democratic debate gave the impression that party was running scared. The lessons had been learned and the mistakes would not be repeated.
The cynics might say that it is all too little too late and they might be right. In the end the loss of Bradford West may yet have wider ramifications than the party currently recognises. It is no secret that the Respect Party has located itself to the Left in British politics and it is taking this message to Labour's Muslim heartlands in the north. The evidence is that it is making steady inroads and by the time of the next general elections, it is likely to be offering itself as the 'real' alternative to Labour.
Labour's response to this emerging challenge is reminiscent of a party on a kamikaze mission of self-destruction. The appointment of a new leader of Labour's Bradford council group, Dave Green, offered an opportunity for Bradford to articulate a reformist agenda. Instead the local party has reinstated Imran Hussain, the byelection loser, as Green's deputy, cocking the proverbial snook at disillusioned voters.
The other area of policy that is likely to erode Labour support among the Muslim community is around the contentious issue of foreign policy. Ed Miliband was candid in acknowledging that British forays into Muslim lands have proven to be highly contentious among Muslim voters. On Afghanistan his position of speaking to the Taliban as part of a political solution was warmly welcomed. However his failure to condemn the massacre of innocents in US drone attacks highlights that in the world of realpolitik, the 'special' relationship with America remains totemic.
Where Miliband appeared to strike an emotional connection with his audience was over the issue of Islamophobia. Yes he understood the pain and bemoaned the ignorance that produces such prejudice. But the truth is that it was on his watch that Labour created the conditions that legitimated the demonisation of Muslims: the community cohesion policy and the attrition of civil liberties and human rights in the name of the war on terror happened under New Labour. Political amnesia diminishes him as a politician.
A more appropriate response would have been to acknowledge his party's culpability and reassure his audience that he intended to use his role as the opposition leader to challenge the racist underpinnings of many of the government's present policies. The truth is that for an electorate drip-fed on a diet of the Muslim bogeyperson, this is unlikely to be a popular electoral strategy. Likewise the contamination of the rights agenda by the present government is likely to present similar challenges to any attempts by the Labour party to defend the Equality Act which the coalition government is intent on ripping apart.
What was palpable at the meeting was Miliband's frustration at the pace at which the coalition government is dismantling the State and his awareness that should Labour come into power the prospect of putting Humpty Dumpty back again would be well nigh impossible. Perhaps that is why he was unable to offer a satisfactory response to the numerous concerns around the underachievement of Muslim children and the barriers to educational access. While the Education Secretary, Michal Gove's reforms in education are eroding the traditional state education infrastructure, there is a clear recognition that Labour is implicated because the genesis of many of these policies can be tracked back to the New Labour enterprise.
One positive outcome from the meeting was the Labour leader's receptivity to JUST West Yorkshire's proposal to support the establishment of an All Party Parliamentary Group for the north, a bigger version of the one newly-established for Yorkshire and the Humber. Given the fact that so many of Labour's Cabinet members represent deprived northern constituencies that risk becoming economic wastelands, the setting up of an APPG should offer a sound platform from which to challenge policies that threaten terminal decline for the northern economy.
By the end of the meeting the Labour leader must have been clear about the level of disquiet among Labour's northern loyalists. His decision to stay on and address questions beyond his allotted time was a clear signal to the audience of his desire to understand the issues that have led to the political disconnect between the Labour Party and its voting constituency. Unfortunately this does not address the wedge that exists between politicians and their electorate at a local level.
Perhaps Labour's newly appointed leader on Bradford council may want to emulate his party leader in creating the conditions that allow a full, frank and honest dialogue with residents and businesses. The alternative is to continue with the practice of making critical political, economic and financial decisions behind closed doors. Given the high electoral stakes openness, transparency and accountability are likely to be more effective tools in restoring trust in local democracy.
Ratna Lachman is director of JUST West Yorkshire which promotes racial justice, civil liberties and human rights in the north of England.
You can read the Guardian's Helen Pidd on Ed Miliband's Bradford meeting here. Irna Qureshi, another Bradford participant in the meeting, has a Northerner post here. We are expecting - and would welcome - further posts on the event.