The heart of Hart
EDWINA HART’s campaign for the Welsh Labour leadership has been as direct and unambiguous as the candidate herself. As we reflected when she launched her manifesto in October, “Her launch event emphasised her personal qualities and her directness of purpose”. This was also clear in her manifesto which stood out because it was never a collection of promises, but more of a narrative which set out not just policies but philosophy.
And clarity of political philosophy has shone through in everything which Edwina Hart has done during this campaign. From her initial decision to stand – done, of course, well after the other two candidates had decided to enter the fray – right through to last night’s Dragon’s Eye, her political vision has been clear. Socialism, radicalism, devolution. These have been the watchwords of an approach that has left no doubt that Edwina is firmly part of the radical left tradition of Welsh Labour politics.
The “late entry” position of the Hart campaign has been something which has been manifest in different ways. From the outset, the campaign has not shied away from the fact that the team came together relatively late and that it needed to move quickly. This has not prevented it from launching a detailed manifesto early in the campaign and also getting an online presence that has grown without needing to change. Further, the sense of urgency provided the Hart attack with bursts of momentum that has been unique in its impact.
Because it was widely trailed that Carwyn Jones had a lead amongst MP endorsements, it was never a shock when the names came through. In contrast, when Edwina Hart got the support of first Don Touhig and Paul Murphy and later John Smith and Kim Howells, their endorsements were a genuine surprise. Perhaps this was because the two other campaigns had been preparing their ground for longer, perhaps it was because the ideological position of some of her supporters was so unakin to her own on devolution. Whatever the reason, Edwina has been the candidate in this election most capable of bringing the element of surprise.
This was also reflected on two other occasions which a sudden burst of success changed the nature of the way the campaign was being perceived. The first was when Jane Hutt backed Edwina, giving her more AM supporters than her rivals. The other was when she took the endorsements of five Constituency Labour Parties in one evening. I dropped my pint and my bacon sandwich, in that order, when these stories broke – the only times I have been genuinely gobsmacked during the last six weeks.
The ability to surprise is also apparent in this video from her campaign team. Watch it and enjoy thr lightness of touch.
One criticism of her candidacy is that it lacks the human touch. This video reflects a feeling which I share, that the Hart campaign – from visual logo, through language, through narrative manifesto, through to media appearances – disputes this. It has all been about the human touch.
“I Hart” is an ideal representation of a campaign which has always been about more than policies: it is about approach and, too. The directness of the Health Minister should not obscure a very human, sympathetic side which is the first thing so many of her colleagues and friends refer to when they talk about the heart of Hart. Many interest groups who have dealt with her in government will attest to this, too. She is not just a person of action, she is an attentive listener, and this informs the action she takes.
Perhaps the bursts of energy and sense of adventure of the Hart campaign are a good reflection of the Minister’s personality too. She is not a person to be phased by challenges and entering the race so late in the day never seemed to be an issue. To her team, it has been a challenge and a strength.
We had come to expect this approach from Edwina. It is one she has demonstrated in each of the many government portfolios she has held. When others in Labour were battle weary in May 2007, Edwina took on the health portfolio and showed she still had a zest for change and an appetite for delivery. Her actions over the ensuing two years have demonstrated this clearly. With Edwina you know what you’re getting, you know where she’s going. As I wrote at the start of this post, direct and unambiguous.
Win or lose, Edwina Hart’s candidacy in this election has been both of those things – and also energetic and ideologically clear, too. Four characteristics which Welsh Labour as a whole has seemed not to possess for some years.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flickr
Ha ha ha ha …
Heaven help us!
This is a little embarrassing, Daran. Your piece on Huw Lewis was obviously genuine, and chimed with the feeling amongst Party members and commentators alike. Edwina’s ‘campaign’ on the other hand has been a disaster, as I think you know. I know you’ve got a job to think of after this, but really…
Over the last few days I have written three of the most difficult posts yet put up on this website or any other to which I have contributed. In appraising each of the three campaigns, I have looked positively at their strengths and achievements. There are plenty of other places out there that prefer to focus on knocking copy.
You say that my piece on Huw “chimed with the feeling amongst Party members and commentators alike.” Maybe, maybe not. Certainly some of the Plaid bloggers took issue with a certain phrase which I used, and which I stand by. So there was no unified perspective amongst the commentariat. Indeed, on certain aspects of Huw’s campaign and their impact (as with the other two campaigns), the WalesHome home team, as it were, has differed in opinion.
Views of campaigns are never uniform. You may savage the Hart campaign – and from your undertone you obviously do – but why should I?
Differences of opinion are totally natural. Sometimes that comes from having access to different sources, or looking at things in different ways. For example, I’ve tried at different points to examine the contest not just from an electoral mechanics side but also by comparing what candidates have said on issues. Not everyone who comments – and certainly not every party member – even bothers to read manifestos, less still all three. That’s not to assume an air of superiority (which comes all too naturally to me, I’m afraid) but rather to stress that people look at things in different ways and from different standpoints.
Another factor would be party hustings. Not being a member of the Labour Party, I have not attended any. Indeed, because of their regional nature, I would suspect that very few people outside immediate campaign teams would have. People who would have been to one would have seen a certain perspective, perhaps personal to them, and this might have varied to the person in the next seat or the person in the next hustings. So my view isn’t complete, but then again how many people’s views are?
You may think Edwina’s campaign has been a disaster but that is a subjective viewpoint. Just because you presume it to be shared, that does not make it group-think.
What I have tried to do in this post – and I can accept that you do not agree Si – is look at Edwina’s campaign from the perspective of what it was trying to achieve and has achieved. The campaign the team has run has been energetic, direct, and, to my mind, more philosophically driven than the others. It has also delivered some genuinely robust and exciting moments. It started later and that has showed, but it also has given it a certain excitement and “what next” feel.
This post is as “obviously genuine” as the one I wrote for Huw’s campaign and the one I wrote for Carwyn’s. I am glad they have pushed people into responding.
Spot on Daran.
The leadership election has, up until now, been contested by the three candidates in a very fair, open and comradely way. It’s a shame that one individual – presumably a Huw Lewis supporter – has lowered the debate to this level. Shame.
The coverage of the leadership election on WalesHome has been by far the best. It’s put the BBC and the Western Mail to shame.
I have to say that while I am not a labour member, or any party for that matter (I will get to use my Unison vote for the first time though!) I have been reading the BBC, walesonline & WalesHome because I really don’t know who these people are who are going to run Wales.
I’ve got to say that Daram, Adam and Duncan have at least told me about what all these politicians are. Sometimes I can’t get my head around all this backstabbing. It is typical political spin and a real turn off to someone like me voting for the first time. I think that this site has been telling it like it is. Huw sounds cool but Edwina’s a bit like a Welsh Mam, takes no nonsense but will look after her family till the end. That’s where my vote will go.
Well said, Daran.
This is WalesHome.org, and we’re entitled to say what we want to say, how we want to say it, when we want to say it. We’re not bound by political or any other conventions. This site was, is, and always will be independent, with no agendas save one – we want the best ideas, the best writing we can find. We won’t always achieve it, but we will always strive for it. And that comes ahead of any other consideration.
And that’s our manifesto.
Jack – “It’s a shame that one individual – presumably a Huw Lewis supporter – has lowered the debate to this level.”
That isn’t helpful. You have no proof.
To be honest what Si said may be just a big difference of opinion on campaign perceptions. They might or might not be in Huw’s camp or Carwyn’s come to that. Ultimately that’s not the issue, it’s that people are entitled to their own take, and we’re not part of some accepted view or group think.