Movement

I Agree with Butch

Butch Wilkins, eh? Of all the pundits, in all the world.

Ray Wilkins: the man who when he was Sky’s analyst during the 2005 Champions League Final almost started speaking in an Italian accent at half-time (he played for Milan you know, you may have heard him mention it occasionally); with the slowing of his speech and delicate hand gestures, he was only missing a cappuccino and a pair of sun glasses from an on-air transformation, before suddenly morphing into a Ray Winstone type after the game, adopting a broad cockney accent, extolling the virtues of the British Bulldog spirit, and practically clenching his fists.

Yes, Butch has called it wrong before. But this time he may just be the man who has hit the nail on the head.

There may have been no “my word”, “I am tad surprised” or “that young man”, but Wilkins uttered the great unspoken truth this week: Glenn Hoddle should be a serious candidate to be the next England manager.

To be fair to Wilkins, even in the mid-eighties he was speaking up for Hoddle at his own expense; when Bobby Robson was picking Wilkins ahead of Hoddle in central midfield, Wilkins was honest enough to say what most of the country thought at the time, that Hoddle should be in the England first XI ahead of him.

These Wooden Ideas

Those were the dire days of the flat 4-4-2 which still continued after Wilkins’ time as an international player, and into Euro ’88, when Neil Webb was then picked ahead of Hoddle to suit the system. These wooden ideas even carried on when Hoddle was unavailable, and into the first match of the World Cup of Italia ’90, when Chris Waddle and John Barnes spent the game chasing Irish full-backs.

As a player Hoddle suffered at the hands of backward thinking and negative team selection, but so did English Football, and England fans. It is not hindsight that leads me to say 4-4-2 didn’t suit our best talents; at school during a Geography a lesson, circa early 1989, I penned an England team that had three at the back and had Waddle and Barnes in free roles, well over a year before Bobby Robson (with the encouragement of Don Howe and several senior players), played that system in the second match of Italia ‘90. Admittedly my team was only seen by friends sitting next to me, and is a reason that if I ever go on the quiz show ‘Pointless’ I will take someone who actually paid attention in Geography lessons; but it was clear to me even then, playing in straight lines didn’t work.

Hoddle, as England Manager the first time round, recognised that. He had already showed first at Swindon, and then at Chelsea, a progressive approach, playing a passing and moving game playing with a sweeper (often himself) that could dictate the pace of the game and also step up into midfield.

There was heavy irony that part of the reason that he didn’t win as many caps as he should have was for having a reputation of not being able to tackle, when at both Swindon and Chelsea he showed many times he was a fine tackler; of course though, at his peak, there is no way he should have been tracking back. He knew where he was most potent. But whereas our contemporaries gave Maradona, Zico and Platini license to roam and do damage, our own tactics board were being drawn up in a darkened room, where negativity was king.

Bobby Robson’s change in approach came too late for Hoddle as a player, and was his final flourish as an England Manager, having already agreed to manage PSV Eindhoven at the end of Italia ’90. Robson went on to improve as a coach after his eight years with England, with European experience, first in the Netherlands, and then Portugal and Spain. England, meanwhile, went backwards again, appointing Graham Taylor, who ostracised Chris Waddle for being a flair player, and was of the understanding Paul Gascoigne was only in the team for his set-pieces.

After Taylor’s last match, the dead-rubber against San Marino, when we freakishly, but symbolically, went 1-0 down after seven seconds, The Independent newspaper asked readers to suggest who the next man for the job should be. In those days there before Social Networking or emails and mobile phones were commonplace, as a student, I got the word processor out, and wrote a letter which appeared in print the next day. My choice then was, as it is now, Glenn Hoddle.

While England didn’t appoint Hoddle in 1994, they did make perhaps a better choice in hindsight, selecting Terry Venables, while Hoddle got another couple of years experience in club Management. But international football is surely where Hoddle is best suited. Both Venables, and then Hoddle after him, improved the England first-team both technically and tactically. And both left the job for non-footballing reasons.

The Man who should be King

In contrast to what followed after him, Hoddle got the tactics right in big games. I was at Wembley for every one of Hoddle’s competitive home games, although it was overseas where he really excelled. Without the injured Alan Shearer, England still became the first ever away team to get a point against Italy in Rome, successfully finishing top of the qualifying group for the 1998 World Cup Finals. In the Finals themselves, Hoddle planned for a seven match campaign, with first-class preparation beforehand and behind the scenes, while during the tournament taking the whole squad to see who he thought would be their opponents would be in the final, Brazil.

He was brave enough to pick Paul Scholes as his main playmaker, and introduced David Beckham and Michael Owen as the tournament progressed, with Beckham influencing the game from a more central position. Even in the final game against Argentina, once down to ten men, Hoddle rotated Shearer and Owen, so they could both take turns as the front man, while England kept their shape.

A year earlier in France, England won Le Tournoi, coming in for me at odds of 5-1, ahead of the hosts themselves, as well as Italy and Brazil. The 2-0 win against a full strength Italian side was one of the best footballing displays by any England side in a friendly in the last thirty years, with beautiful, fluent, attacking passing and movement.

Hoddle was intent on preparing a side with a winning mentality at International football that would succeed at competition level, and would play with the sophistication and intelligence needed on the pitch.

Coupled with his strategic qualities, Hoddle also improves players with his coaching. In ‘Out of Time’, Alex Fynn and Lynton Guest’s mid-nineties book on football, Hoddle explains how he improved the habits of established players at Swindon late in their career with simple 15 minute training sessions, a method endorsed by glowing testimony from his players, who talk about their improved technique and confidence.

For the national side, that improved confidence and technique seemed to be evident not just in Le Tournoi, but also on a cool Wednesday night at Wembley in April 1998, in a cracking England performance against Portugal ahead of the World Cup, when David Batty suddenly turned into a cute playmaker. (At International Level it is arguable that players shouldn’t need much training on technique and confidence – the performances of the England team at the 2010 World Cup, when we struggled to pass the ball, amongst other things, suggests otherwise).

England won 3-0 against Portugal that night with Hoddle giving the 18-year old Michael Owen another run-out as a substitute, with an eye on how he would use him in the World Cup. Hoddle knew though that Sheringham and Shearer was his first choice partnership, a combination that not only took England to the brink of their first major final for thirty years in Euro ’96, but had served him so well in qualification.

It was hard to leave Owen out after the World Cup though, and against his instincts, he picked Owen ahead of Sheringham at home to Bulgaria in qualification for Euro 2000, and predictably England struggled to break the opposition down, without a striker who would play between the lines. That Saturday afternoon at Wembley was frustrating, as much for a rare tactical flaw in a Hoddle team, as for the goalless draw. We missed the suspended Paul Ince that day, and though Sheringham came on, he couldn’t affect the game. The initial team selection was unusual for Hoddle, to almost be swayed by press and public opinion; the fact that he wasn’t a populist was another reason why he was the right man for the job.

Journalists didn’t like the way he organised press conferences, the fact that he had his own self-belief rather than pandering to their own sense of self-importance, or that he didn’t give quotes or interviews at the drop of a hat. And it was for those reasons they went after him.

After the Bulgaria game, England won away at Luxembourg four days later, in what turned out to be Hoddle’s last competitive game as England Manager. There was a further friendly win against the Czech Republic, but Hoddle was to be undone the following year. On Saturday 30^th January, as I was travelling up to see Spurs play away at Blackburn, the headline news was a brief comment Hoddle gave contained within in a telephone interview that lasted over an hour to Matt Dickenson which The Times led with that morning. There was nothing new or original, but within days, Tony Blair was on This Morning, giving a soundbite on something he had no knowledge, and the press had got their man. (Again, it wasn’t the time for soundbites).

The Age of the Understatement

Amazingly as Hoddle departed Kevin Keegan was seen as the ideal replacement. Anyone who watched Keegan co-commentating on England during the previous two major tournaments would have realised there was no end in his capacity to call things totally wrong. However, Harry Redknapp, never shy of giving an interview, also joined the press and public chorus, saying on TV at the time that Keegan was the right man to lead England. I always doubted this, and the disappointment of a 0-0 at home to Bulgaria paled into insignificance compared to the night I had at Wembley when we were humiliatingly outplayed by Scotland in the second leg of the play-off for Euro 2000. Keegan admitted afterwards he was no master tactician. Master tactician no, master of the under statement, yes.

The tactics continued to be poor in the finals themselves, and beyond, ending on a very wet and miserable Saturday afternoon, with a 1-0 home defeat at the hands of the Germans in the last game to be played at the Empire Stadium. It was a rotten day all round, until news came through in the pub afterwards the game that Keegan had resigned.

Qualification for three tournaments looked much easier under Sven Goran Ericsson, but we were left wanting in the biggest games in the Finals; we were tactically poor against Brazil in the World Cup Final quarter-final in 2002, despite having an extra man, and against Portugal in 2004, the decision to replace the injured Wayne Rooney, who had been so effective from deep, with Darius Vassell rather than a player who could link play-up, such as Joe Cole, was simply incredible.

There is no doubt the so-called golden-generation were over hyped, with their habits of giving the ball cheaply away, (as they do in the Premier League with no consequence), being punished harshly at the highest level, but Ericsson, McClaren and Capello have all had a much more talented players at their disposal than Hoddle ever did.

The one missing ingredient on the pitch both Venables and Hoddle benefited from, and England have sorely lacked, Paul Ince, may now has a worthy successor, as Capello is finally utilising Scott Parker. He has yet to be as effective in the final third as Ince, but he still could be. It remains a mystery as to why Parker was left of the 2010 World Cup squad, just as to how an experienced manager like Capello could go into the Germany game with a midfield that so readily empties.

But then this tactical naivety seems prevalent in the game covered in England; despite Spain, Germany and Holland all playing great football in 2010 with a 4-2-3-1, most pundits named only one sitting midfielder when naming their team of the tournament. Even on Saturday, the BBC’s expert, Martin Keown, the man the press are touting as the man to solve Arsenal’s defensive problems, named a midfield four with two wingers and Steven Gerrard in central midfield, for his England starting line-up on Football Focus. (Sign him up Arsene).

Nice Dream

There is one rare pundit that does talk sense though. When Sky Sports showed extended highlights of England’s defeat to Croatia at Wembley in 2007 straight after the match, Hoddle was on top form. He spoke with genuine passion and disappointment, but brought real insight into the most minute technical aspects of the game (from goalkeeping positioning to close control), as well as tactics. Richard Keys, who used to refer to Hoddle with disdain when Hoddle was Spurs Manager, almost had his tongue hanging out, before asking, with a purr at the end, the obvious question we were all wondering: why wasn’t he still England Manager?

Hoddle’s critics question his man-management, but even past players he has had fallings out with, such as Tim Sherwood at Tottenham, has admitted culpability in hindsight, saying he should have respected Hoddle’s opinion. And compared to the press and bookies favourite, Harry Redknapp, Hoddle’s man-management doesn’t seem so bad. (And Hoddle is unlikely to ask his most talented player to spend most of his energy going backwards).

The Carlos Tevez affair has shown a new understanding in the press and the public that the tail can’t wag the dog, but that can’t only be applicable because the player is foreign and earns a lot of money. A football manager should be entitled to a fair opportunity as well as respect because they carry the can for their footballing decisions. 

Hoddle has the best technical and tactical understanding of all the English candidates, he is a passionate England fan, has managerial experience at the highest level, and he is available. Whether the FA are brave enough to pick someone the gentleman of the press don’t want, and allow him to fully control the football reigns, is another matter. But the fact that there could be an England team that will show passing and movement at the highest level is a nice dream, nonetheless. 

MG

My e-book about my journey in the Champions League from a qualifier in Wankdorf to the front row at Wembley in the Final, via an epic series of El Clasicos, is now available to buy as an e-book on Amazon or Smashwords. It recalls past footballing memories, from Diego Maradona's one appearance at White Hart Lane to Spurs qualifying for the UEFA Cup Final in 1984, as Tottenham returned to the European Cup after an abscence of 49 Seasons.

International Brigade Memorial Trust 75th Anniversary Gala

Saturday 1^st October 2011, The New Red Lion, Islington

On 1^st October 1936 Franco was appointed generalissimo of Nationalist Spain and head of state, leading the Nationalist rebels in the Spanish Civil War, with support from Nazi Germany. Exactly seventy-five years on, on what was the hottest recorded October day in Britain to-date, the International Brigade Memorial Trust (IMBT) held a night of entertainment in Islington organized by Philosophy Football, to commemorate those who united against the fascists.

Philosophy Football (PF) have long been supporters of the IMBT. Five years ago on a night out drinking with a mate in Central London I was wearing their ‘No Pasaran’ anti-fascist t-shirt (pictured below) when we stopped off in an Italian restaurant just north of Oxford Street; after being served a couple of beers the staff questioned me about my t-shirt, and when I started talking about British volunteers in the Spanish Civil War they brought up the Spanish chef from the kitchen to argue passionately with me about how I was wrong, and Franco was actually a great bloke. “You’re not Spanish are you?” “No, I am English and wearing this for the British Battalion and all International Volunteers”. (When the chef finally went back down to the kitchen and I was asked for my order, I naturally just asked for the bill for the two beers and left).

As the writer Andy Croft said on Saturday night in the less heated environement of the New Red Lion (metaphorically if not literally), the Spanish Civil War is more than just a poetic romantic notion for artists: many men and women lost their lives, and as at a number of previous IMBT/PF events over the last few years, surviving ex-volunteers were in attendance to both commemorate and celebrate the international effort.

Fellow speakers on stage with Andy Croft as the evening got going were the historian Helen Graham, writer Victoria Hislop, broadcaster Robert Elms, and Billy Bragg. At a previous IMBT/PF event at the same venue in on the last Friday night of March 2008, Billy led a very impassioned and moving version of ‘The Internationale', which will be unforgettable for those of us lucky to be in the room; on Saturday he spoke about today’s activism, and the youth leafleting on the streets of Barking and Dagenham ahead of last year’s General Election, standing up against the far-right, who see the current economic conditions and general cynicism to politics as a fertile breeding ground for a campaign of hate.

Saturday was about more than politics though, as Jackie Kay’s wonderful autobiographical poetry held the full attention of a packed hot house for 45 minutes. Kay (pictured above by Simon Green, the Producer of the night) has superb comic timing, and delivered a great set that was funny and insightful throughout.

There was music on the evening from ‘na-mara’, and Tayo Aluko performed a truncated version of his one-man play ‘Call Mr Robeson’ which included a version of ‘Joe Hill’. Aluko fitted his act into an hour, and despite the heat survived in his padded suit. The evening’s entertainment was finished off with a specially commissioned song by Grace Petrie (pictured second below by Simon Green). I first saw her perform supporting Billy Bragg at The Troxy last December, another cracking night.

The audience and mix of entertainment of the 75^th Anniversary was a reminder that the Internationale ideal still unites the human race. (And on North London Derby Weekend, Saturday would be the only occasion for red flags to be waved with pride).

The Killing

A layered Danish Thriller

On the Saturday evenings when I stayed in at the start of the year, I was watching ‘Broadwalk Empire’, on Sky’s newly launched channel Sky Atlantic. Though it never reached the heights of some of the great American Drama serials of the last fifteen years, it was decent enough television; there were strong lead performances from great actors including Steve Bescumi, Kelly McDonald and Michael Shannon, and an opening episode that was easily identifiable as being directed by Martin Scorsese.

It was admittedly hard work sitting through episodes I hadn’t recorded, and couldn’t fast forward between the ridiculous amount of ad breaks, but I stuck with it, because the best American drama (such as The Sopranos, The Wire, West Wing, Dexter and Six Feet Under) has shown that television can be a superior medium to cinema. The long-running serial allows multiple-storylines, complex plots, characters to have real depth and personality, as well as a sub-context only previously achieved in great novels.

While I was watching ‘Broadwalk Empire’, BBC4 was showing the Danish drama ‘The Killing’ (translated from 'Forbrydelsen'), which did all of the above, and more. With 20 episodes and one main plot, it eschewed conventional television rules, while perfectly living up to the billing it gives itself in it’s opening titles – a thriller.

I became conscious of ‘The Killing’ midway during its first airing in BBC4, mainly because of its mentions on Twitter and in the Radio Times. It was too late to catch up on it then, and I stayed away from finding anything else out about it, as I planned to watch it at some point; thankfully, BBC4 re-ran all 20 episodes again over four weeks, with the conclusion last night.

All I knew about it when I settled down to watch the first episode less than a month ago was that it was a Scandinavian series, with a lead character, a detective called Sarah Lund, who wore woolly jumpers. (I have since read the jumpers represented both the character’s independence and sense of community spirit. Can’t argue with that).

It was engrossing from the start, while early impressions hinted at themes from other dramas. The beginning reminded me of early episodes of ‘Twin Peaks’, and I also thought ‘The West Wing’ may have been an influence, with a number of characters fighting an election in City Hall. (The 20 episodes/20 days may have also been a formula from ‘24’, a programme I have never seen).

But all thoughts of televisions formulas and references are soon forgotten, as the drama takes hold. ‘The Killing’ works so well as a thriller because as a viewer, we are always being led down particular paths (some of them blind alleys) by a wonderful combination of writing, direction, camera work, and use of music. From red jackets to red herrings, we are always at the mercy of the plot.

The acting is also first-rate; in an interview with Alison Graham in the Radio Times (26^th March 2011), Sofie Grabol who plays Sarah Lund, said the actors were only given the scripts on an episode-by-episode basis, and they were shot in sequence, with none of the cast knowing who committed the killing for months into filming.

The dark lighting and bleaker shades that are constant in ‘The Killing’ always suggest death and danger, and not just when Lund is going into the unknown; in episode 16 for example, an ordinary daytime meeting held in City Hall is so dimly lit, the overbearing light comes from the sun shining through the big bay window opposite the primary camera shot, so the main players almost look like silhouettes, making a mockery of traditional television story-telling.

Meanwhile, all the characters are rounded; as if created by Dostoyevsky, some of them linger in our mind long after an episode has ended, giving pause for thought and appearing in our dreams, as we gradually learn more about them. Like the story, aspects of the characters are slowly fed to us. No-one is perfect, whether it be due to making massive misjudgements, using racist language, or keeping dark secrets. Over 20 episodes we are taken through the mill, both with the emotions of the characters, and the ever unfolding developments of the plot. And the next episode can never come soon enough.

The scheduling of the rerun of The Killing at peak-time, five consecutive nights a week, was a masterstroke on the part of BBC4; many of the great US dramas mentioned earlier were first consumed by us, the viewing public, on DVD, and a 20 episode season of a quality drama would have been comfortably eaten up inside 4 weeks.  

The BBC has heavily invested in making original drama itself this year, and delivered ‘The Shadow Line’, a bona-fide British Thriller which had wonderful characters, a brilliant cast, a chilling plot and more twists than a Chubby Checker convention. It is a British Drama that ranks alongside ‘Our Friends in the North’, ‘GBH’ and ‘This Life’, all of which had more episodes to play with; admittedly not a second was wasted in the seven episodes of ‘The Shadow Line’, although occasionally the dialogue seemed less natural than in ‘The Killing’ (or at least the translation we saw).

But with the BBC licence fee frozen for the next six years, as another political act of the current Con-Dem Government (who at the same time are letting private train companies raise their fares around 8% in the next year), there is little chance the nation’s main broadcaster will invest in a 20 part prime-time drama, as DR, the Danish equivalent of the BBC, did with ‘The Killing’.

And that is a shame. In a week where a big arms fair has taken place in London aimed to boost exports in a failing economy, ‘The Killing’, a Danish export finer than Carlsberg, has been a reminder of the value of well made original television drama.

These past four weeks have flown by (except for the 23 hours in between episodes). Even at the end, like life, there were still some loose ends, but after twenty hours of a developing story there was enough information given for an audience to think for itself.

An intelligent, layered drama, with confidence in its viewers, BBC4 is the perfect place for it. And Season II can’t come quickly enough.

MG

My e-book which has echoes of Glory from the words of Bruce Springsteen to Danny Blanchflower, as I travelled through Europe in the 2010-11 Season, is now available to buy from either Amazon or Smashwords.

Mixing Pop and Politics

Walking into the Logan Hall yesterday initially brought back a Pavlovian memory of a very different occasion, back at the turn of the century, when Tony Blair and Gordon Brown joined forces in the spirit of “my enemy’s enemy is now my friend”, trying to dissuade London Labour Party members from electing Ken Livingstone as London Mayor. On that midweek evening in winter there were queues round the block and people locked out, such was the demand to be in the audience; Alastair Campbell and the then recently defected Shaun Woodward manned the stairwells, communicating via headsets like a New Labour Secret Police.

The anti-Livingstone message of course, thankfully, had no effect, but the audience were allowed to ask questions on anything, and they did. The everlasting memory of the night was seeing Blair, who spoke charismatically throughout, talk with real passion and genuine belief in favour of international intervention in oppressed countries in order to save lives, withstanding the hostility he was facing from a questioner who was asking about Britain’s specific interests in the then more innocent age of the time, pre-9/11.

Yesterday’s event was something completely different, the Compass’ annual conference, this year entitled ‘Building the Good Society’. I was a guest of Philosophy Football, supporting them on a day when they staged their first ever Compass Seminar, which was on the subject of engaging people in politics. Unlike most seminars it started with a live song from Maddy Carty  and a short five minute You Tube film on Egypt by student Sanum Ghafoor A panel of Pat Kane, (the writer once of Hue and Cry), Heather Wakefield  (Unison National Officer) and Deborah Grayson (writer and activist) followed, discussing social networking as Jessica Riches tweeted throughout, while also touching on ideas including the “franchising” of future Uncut protests, so demonstrations take place simultaneously nationwide, as well as the collective experience of being involved in politics through both music and comedy. 

The main event of the day though was a Question Time debate in the main conference hall, expertly chaired, with both decisiveness and humour, by The New Statesman’s Medhi Hasan. In contrast to television’s Question Time, there was no dumbing down, and there were proper answers from a strong panel. The panel included Polly Toynbee, whose writing I was first introduced to in an English Language lesson at school, at a time when she still worked for the BBC; I went onto write about her in a final Public Relations exam I had at University the day after she was the subject of a typically misogynistic attack by the Daily Mail, and remain a big fan of her books and regular Guardian columns. (When I first arrived at the conference and was standing behind the Philosophy Football stall, I took the opportunity, to say hello to her as she was passing – always nice to speak to people you admire).

Also on the panel was Green MP Caroline Lucas, Labour’s rising star Chuka Umunna (who was speaking in between appearing at three separate London school fates), Baroness Professor Ruth Lister, and the always engaging, intelligent and incisive John Harris. Earlier in the day I had gone to a seminar where Harris was speaking on how the Labour Party can engage with the progressive left, where he highlighted the need to not be complacent. In the main session he told how due to the ridiculous First Past the Post electoral system, he, a Labour activist, was compelled to campaign for a Liberal Democrat at the last General Election in order to stop a Tory winning, something he said, to the cheers of the crowd, he would never do again.

Harris is such a good speaker because as well as being intelligent, he is always honest, and speaking in favour of nuclear power as a viable source of energy compared to unclean coal, as he did in this debate, was both intelligent and honest, if not universally popular in the room, and certainly not on a panel with The Green Party’s Caroline Lucas.

Lucas was also critical about the perception of Labour Party’s recent focus on benefit fraud, saying they were targeting people fighting to get by, and inferring they were punching down rather than up; Chuka Umunna acknowledged there was disproportionate coverage of benefit fraud which, according to the figures he quoted, cost the Treasury £800m a year compared to Banking Sector issues that cost £1.3 trillion.

The profile on Compass’ Twitter Page explains that Compass is committed to building a good society, with greater equality and democracy, and that is what this Question Time was ultimately about. In one question a member of the audience told of the banning of girls wearing trousers at a school, giving a perfect example of the unaccountability of decision makers that have risen up in David Cameron’s “Big Society”, an idea flawed on so many levels.

The deficit is a very thin disguise to the severe ideological and political cuts Cameron’s Government is making to state spending, and it was this that was inevitably at the root of most of the questions from the floor. In the answers, there was general agreement that as well as a pay-ration in the public sector, there should also be one in the private sector. Caroline Lucas also pointed out the fallacy of the coalition’s talk of protecting front-line services while making cuts to back-line services that the front-lines services depend on to run properly.

Impending industrial action, the “Labour of Love” Hue and Cry once sang about, that may stem from the cuts was of course discussed. All the panellists, while defending the right to withdraw labour, were vary of long strikes; echoing Ed Balls’ recent public comments, Umunna suggested a long drawn-out strike was exactly what this Government wanted to turn the public mood against state workers; Polly Toynbee said long strikes should always be avoided unless they were certain to produce a win; and John Harris, stylishly getting to the heart of the matter as always, pointed out how poorly the case had been made by unions so far for striking – there is a case to be made that public sector workers are on low-pay that hasn’t been made but the idea of “gold-plated pensions” have got to be ditched and comparisons with the miners strike were particularly bad.

In sharp contrast to the Blair-Brown axis against Ken Livingstone over ten years ago now, both the main debate and the conference were progressive and forward looking with Umunna at one point, perhaps unwittingly, using the Bruce Springsteen lyric, “the ties that bind” when talking about the next steps with The Labour Party. The days for in-fighting and political naivety need to be over as from the IMF to the current coalition government, the monetarists are currently calling the shots and quickly unravelling the fabric of what a good society is built on. Those of us who do believe in a Good Society need to co-ordinate, communicate the message clearly and present an alternative. This conference was a good start.