James Purnell’s announcement last week that he is stepping down from Parliament is a great shame to anybody who wants politics to achieve progressive ends.  I have written before about how Purnell underestimates the ideas put forward as part of the ‘progressive Conservative’ umbrella.   Having said that, his contributions, particularly since leaving the Cabinet, have been genuinely thought provoking and pretty compelling.  Read last week’s speech at the LSE as an example and compare it with Miliband’s particularly substance light Demos speech yesterday.

Despite the protestations of the likes of Liberal Conspiracy (and quite a few left wing friends of mine) who still seem to detest Purnell, we should all be sad that people who are radicals and thought leaders think it is better off for them to be outside of Parliament rather than inside.  What does that say about the health of our politics and our political process?  Witness, as well, the announcement by Tony Benn before the last election that he was resigning from Parliament “to devote more time to politics.”  Or the fact that, love him or hate him, Daniel Hannan prefers to be outside rather than within Parliament.  Or even the resignation of the likes of the highly talented Bryan Gould a few years ago.

It is worth reading Kenneth Morgan’s excellent life of Keir Hardie, or looking at the causes of Chartism and the other great radical movements to understand the emphasis placed on gaining working class and radical representation inside the House of Commons.  Indeed, that is one of the many things that sets British radicalism aside from continental radicalism.  What does it say about the modern House of Commons that so many people of radical views feel that the best place for them is outside of Parliament?

Of course, there are many potential reasons for this.  The growth of unelected institutions, at a national, European and international level has, undoubtedly weakened the power of Parliament.  The judiciary, rather than elected decision makers, plays an increasingly activist role. The power of the 24 hour media has probably diminished the capacity for ‘thinkers’ to gain breathing space whilst under the media spotlight.  The power of the party hierarchy and the whips has undoubtedly grown, to the detriment of a healthy democracy.  The rise of the blogosphere and think tanks means that radical ideas can potentially gain as much emphasis when expressed outside of Parliament than outside.

There is little doubt that political reform is urgent and overdue.  The role of Parliament undoubtedly needs to be strengthened.  It is, surely, tragic that some of the best thinkers and most talented politicians no longer see being in the House of Commons as being the pinnacle of political life.

The best poster and viral campaign of the election was launched this morning, with the Conservatives launching a campaign aimed at people who have never voted Tory before but may do so this time round.

This is exactly the kind of poster campaign we should be pursuing.  It is based on a set of factors that will determine the next election result:

• Success at the next election will depend upon us forming a new electoral coalition.
• A key part of this coalition will be people who have never voted Tory before and, in some cases, may never have even considered voting Conservative before.
• Elections are won on the centre ground.  That is where we, thankfully, now are and where we must remain if we are to build and maintain this electoral coalition.

People who have voted Labour all of their lives who have grown sick and tired and are looking for an alternative.  We must make clear that we are a real progressive alternative and that we can be trusted with the vote of lne natifelong Labour voters.   As I mentioned in a talk to the TRG last week, there are millions of working class ex Labour voters who feel that they have been let down by the Labour Party they placed so much faith in.

We must make our message to voters who feel let down by their traditional party thoroughly compelling.  We must make clear how a progressive Conservative government will make them and their families better off; lead to a better quality of life for all; and protect and improve public services.

If we are successful in attracting and retaining the support of first time Tory voters then the progressive Conservative project could lead to a fundamental realignment of British politics.

Toby Young is speaking at a Bright Blue event this Monday night about why he wants to set up his own school under the Conservatives’ plans for Swedish-style school reform.

He will be in discussion with Anthony Seldon, head of Wellington School, about why we educate children, what for, to what end…  Because our schools need to deliver skills and values that prepare our students for twenty first century Britain. Children need the core skills that come from traditional subjects as well as strong communication skills and creativity to be able to thrive.

We have to raise standards for all by supporting the creation of new schools in the most deprived areas so all children have the opportunity to achieve, irrespective of their background.

So are our schools achieving this? If not, why not? And how do we change them so that all our children do have that opportunity?

Anyone can attend: please click here to reserve your place

Update at 9.05am: Anthony Seldon and Peter Hyman (former No 10 staffer and now a deputy head in London) discussed the upcoming debate on Radio 4’s Today programme just before 9am.

Gordon Brown’s deathbed conversion to the cause of electoral reform is surely one of the most cynical acts in modern British politics.

Don’t forget that Labour were elected in 1997 on a mandate to have a referendum on electoral reform, just as they were elected in 2005 on a mandate of a referendum on Lisbon.  What was one of the major stumbling blocks to holding a referendum on the Jenkins Report?  Why it was the steadfast opposition to reform of a certain Gordon Brown!  Could this be the same man who yesterday embraced the cause of reforming the electoral system?

Brown’s conversion to reform is an act of unprincipled political desperation.  He is looking to change the rules of the game because his team has fallen behind.  This is the last throw of the dice by a desperate Prime Minister.  It is not a serious case for political reform.

The result in Massachusetts was a bad blow for the Democrats.   A previously solidly blue state turned into a relatively easy GOP win can only be described as a poor result for Obama, almost a year to the day since the inauguration.  Obama needs to come out fighting after this setback and the previous setbacks in Virginia and New Jersey.  For too much of the past year, the Obama team have allowed an increasingly hysterical Republican right to set the idea and to use the language that frames the debate.  The Obama team need to change this before the mid terms.

Drew Westen, the author of the excellent ‘Political Brain’ makes an excellent point in the Huffington Post today.  He says that:

“It is a truly remarkable feat, in just one year’s time, to turn the fear and anger voters felt in 2006 and 2008 at a Republican Party that had destroyed the economy, redistributed massive amounts of wealth from the middle class to the richest of the rich and the biggest of big businesses, and waged a trillion-dollar war in the wrong country, into populist rage at whatever Democrat voters can cast their ballot against.”

On the economy, despite having inherited the biggest economic mess of any US President since FDR, Obama is rapidly being blamed for a perceived failure to rapidly turn round rising unemployment.  And lets be clear, it is worries about jobs that have driven people to vote GOP in the past few months.  He is being blamed for a perceived cosiness with Wall Street, as opposed to Main Street.  As Westen says, Obama has not successfully painted the recession as Bush’s recession in the same way as FDR managed to term the depression as ‘Hoover’s depression’.

Take healthcare.  The US is in dire need of healthcare reform.  30 million Americans are uninsured.  Reform was a fundamental plank of Obama’s election victory.  Despite this, all of the language around healthcare has been dictated by the Republican right.  Phrases like ‘death panels’ and ‘socialised healthcare’ are designed to scare.  Given that only a few months ago, a large majority of Americans were in favour of a public option, never mind the watered down option that emerged from the Senate, it is astonishing that the Democrats have managed to have the issue turned against them.

In the past twelve months, the Republicans have spared no piece of rhetorical exaggeration as they denounced Obama.  From Palin through to cheerleaders on Fox, such as Beck and Hannitty, the right in American politics has grown hysterical and utterly attack minded.  After years of the GOP governing for a small minority of Americans, the Republicans have been thoroughly populist in their opposition.  At the same time, Obama and the Democrats haven’t fought back.  They have abandoned the populism that made them such a powerful force in the last electoral cycle.  They have allowed the Republicans to frame the debate and shift the debate increasingly rightwards.

Obama needs to take the fight back to an increasingly narrow and increasingly right wing GOP.    He needs to rediscover the populism and the passion that fuelled his campaign.  The Republicans have deserted the centre and that will probably do for them in 2012.  But Obama needs to take back control of the agenda.  And this has to start with the State of the Union address.