As I said last week, this blog is just part of Policy Progress’s activities. We also undertake longer-form work, and will produce 3-4 reports each year that aim to advance thinking on particular topics.
We are now developing our work programme for the first year, and invite suggestions from our readers.
A draft of the work programme is now available. It proposes three major themes:
- A Progressive Path to Prosperity
- Theoretical Foundations
- The Fiscal Record of the Fifth Labour Government
There’s a short description of each theme on the Work Programme page, but I will also elaborate on these over the next fortnight on this blog.
This Thursday’s post will cover ‘A Progressive Path to Prosperity’, and then next week I’ll deal with ‘Theoretical Foundations’ (Tuesday) and ‘The Fiscal Record of the Fifth Labour Government’ (Thursday). Hopefully, this will provide a pretty clear idea of what’s being proposed in each area.
A fourth proposed topic, for initial work and thinking in 2010 before developing into a major theme in 2011, is around child poverty and cycles of disadvantage.
I’m keen to hear your feedback, both on ways of tackling these topics or on other issues that you see as more urgent and/or important.
The comments thread on this post will be the central location for feedback on the draft work programme, although you are also welcome to put forward your views in the comments for later work programme-related posts. Alternately you can email us directly at workprogramme@policyprogress.org.nz.
I will close off feedback on the work programme on Friday 26th March, with a view to finalising the 2010 work programme at the beginning of April.
In the meantime, many of my blog posts are going to focus on the proposed initial themes. Hopefully these will be interesting in their own right and will also help to clarify further the direction and scope of proposed work in these areas.
It doesn’t mean, however, that any topic is a fait accompli until we’ve heard from you!
Tags: child poverty, economy, Fifth Labour Government, progressive thinking, Work Programme
Well it’s a big question David. I particularly like the theoretical foundations theme as I think having a broadly understood theoretical (or dare I say it, ideological) foundation will help any progressive government keep its head together. Indeed I read a piece this morning on the Progress website arguing that it was that lack which hurt “New Labour” in the UK the most.
The 5LG Fiscal Record piece will be useful in terms of actually understanding how that government’s work left the country well set up to weather the biggest economic crisis since the Depression, but what is its forward reach? As a case it is going to be highly unusual, but if you think there are lessons to be learned, then I suspect I want to know what they are.
The economic stuff is critical so agree the third theme.
Here is what, to me, is missing – but it may be straying too far out of policy and into politics instead. What is the way we make policy / argue with the public / persuade people, so that hard arguments can be had and won, rather than deferred and eventually inevitably lost?
Is that the sort of thing PP might get to grips with?
pax, Jordan.
Developing a policy programme that can take us towards a progressive path to prosperity is a really important debate we need to have on the left, I hope you will usefully focus the debate on how to achieve this. I see you have tagged child poverty in this post, I hope this signals that you will focus on this issue in a meaningful way under the path to prosperity theme?
The fiscal record of the Fifth Labour Government may be interesting but will only be useful if it looks forward rather than being a defensive attempt to defend their record, only say this as I see that you worked for them.
A major challenge will be how you get views and perspectives from different groups who do work in this area in order to make your reports both advance and challenge current thinking.
Anyway, good luck with the site, seems like it could be valuable.
Hmm, thanks, some useful food for thought there. The ‘Fiscal Record’ theme not getting a strong endorsement it seems – I’ll be writing a bit more about this one and my rationale for proposing it next Thursday, so will look forward to feedback from that.
@Jordan – I actually think a strong theoretical framework is a crucial starting-point for ‘winning the argument’, even if there’s a bunch of other things around language and framing that may have to be done subsequently. So maybe that topic (which you liked the look of anyway) will also make a start on addressing your suggestion?
@Keruru – yes, you’re right – making sure different views and perspectives inform the analysis is an important challenge – it’s too easy sometimes to just ‘write what you know’! In terms of child poverty issues, my proposal was to do some initial work and thinking in that area in 2010 with a view to developing it into a major theme in 2011 (separately from the ‘prosperity’ theme, which is more economically-focussed).
But of course nothing’s fully decided as yet, so further feedback is welcome!
I think, actually, there is much to be said about the Fiscal Record of the 5th Labour Government, in fact there is an examination required here that hasn’t been undertaken before. For starters, there must be a clear examination of the notional and actual constraints to the transformative agenda and I think from my opinion, this was strangled. Secondly, would the examination of the fiscal record bring about any understanding of the long term intent that is different to what was perceived to have been the intent with the programmes and policies implemented over time. And, thirdly, I think there is merit in understanding where a progressive party might have been taking the country, if only from a what if perspective, all interlinked I suppose but worth while none the less.
The Theoretical framework you are looking to discuss I think might be your first port of call. Understanding the Social Democratic principles at play and why they are important and actually being clear about what we understand these to be in the New Zealand context. All too often, we strangle ourselves with accusations of failing to meet the tests of Social Democratic values, but i would be surprised if there was much of a consensus beyond a core few as to what this means. And, whether we have a model of driving progressive transformation through the political mechanism that is truly actually distinct from any other. I would be interested in this work as a framing for understanding how you intend to examine the fiscal record.
I’m looking forward to seeing the feedback on this process.
Where I’m looking at going with the Theoretical Foundations theme is probably a little different from what you’re talking about there, Kaine. I’ll explain more about this next Tuesday, so will be interested in your thoughts after that.
I think we’re on the same page about why it might be useful to look at the Fiscal Record topic, though – I’ll set out my own take on that next Thursday.
I should add a belated response to Keruru’s earlier point about defensiveness,too. True, I did work for them, but I assure you defending the Fifth Labour Government’s fiscal record isn’t what I’m aiming to do with this theme. I’m confident it stands pretty strongly on its own merits without any help from me. But they did face constraints, and we can learn from those; and I’m sure they also made the wrong fiscal choices at times, and we can learn from those too. More next Thurs.
Hi! Suggestion for a topic: “nanny state” issues and progressive government. The aim to lift families out of the dark ages of children “seen not heard” and physical punishment, with excellent resources such as SKIP – where does that stand now, considering the backlash we experienced about corporal punishment? How does a progressive government want to interact with society / community – is there a good case for better “social engineering”? Post-post-modern Feminism and “women’s issues” (the childcare debate…)
I hope you will have a slot for childcare / family / education-related issues. Must say so far the website has been a bit “male” (science, money …). Thank you for your time.
An interesting idea, Zooey – and some fair observations. I must say, you’ve hit on a slight nagging concern I’ve had about the balance of topics for the work programme.
What do other readers think about having Zooey’s topic or something like it as part of the work programme, instead of one of the current proposals?