Go back

My week by Gordon Marsden

The latest edition of our ivory tower comedy column

After the Labour Party conference, an exclusive extract from the diaries of the shadow minister for higher education, further education, and skills.

Monday

Run off my feet, going between fringe sessions at the Party conference, I bump into Momentum founder Jon Lansman on Brighton seafront wearing a loud floral shirt.

“Gordon, just the person I wanted to see,” he says.
“Really? I haven’t seen Tom Watson, don’t know where he is, and haven’t spoken to him for weeks,” I tell him.
“Gordon, Gordon, Gordon. Don’t look so worried,” he purrs.
“Sorry, Mr Lansman,” I say.
“I just wanted to let you know that you are on Momentum’s target list,” he says.
“My God,” I say.
“That’s going a bit far, comrade member of the national executive committee will suffice,” he says.
“What?” I say confused.
“Look, I just wanted to let you know that you are going to be getting some special attention from Momentum,” he tells me.
“Please Jon, no, I’ve been very supportive of the leadership,” I say.
“Yes, we’ve had our eye on you for some time,” he says.
“Jon, I’m begging you…” I say.
“No need to beg, we’ve decided to send up some teams of Momentum activists to help you retain your Blackpool South seat in the coming general election. It’s a marginal isn’t it?” he says.
“Oh thank you God. That target list,” I say to myself.
“No need to thank me. We’ve abolished the Labour Students group this week, anything else you’d like me to change?” he says.
“Have you thought about that floral shirt?” I say.
He sighs and walks off.

Tuesday

At the end of a long fews day, including the main hall debate on Brexit and the leader’s speech, I’m called in to see Jeremy and Seumas.

“Gordon, you have the ear of important constituencies on Brexit,” says Jeremy.
“Blackpool South?” I say.
“No, students and academics. That’s why we would like to explain the party’s Brexit position to you,” says Jeremy.
“Can we hurry this along, we need to explain it to Keir Starmer in an hour,” says Seumas.
“And you’ve got lots of people to see before that?” I say.
“No, just that it takes about an hour to explain,” says Seumas.
“Now, I want to let you know that we are in favour of a second referendum,” says Jeremy.
“But, we’re not against Brexit,” says Seumas.
“Really?” I say, beginning to be confused.
“Not necessarily,” says Jeremy, “we haven’t decided yet”.
“We are against a deal,” says Seumas.
“But we also want a deal,” says Jeremy.
“Err, OK…” I say totally lost.
“We are against a Tory deal, any Tory deal, Theresa May’s deal, obviously, and any deal Johnson, might bring back from Brussels,” says Seumas.
“But within three months of taking office, we will re-negotiate a deal with the EU,” says Jeremy.
“How will that be different from the Withdrawal Agreement, which the EU says can’t be changed?” I ask.
“It will be a Labour Withdrawal Agreement, obviously, do pay attention Marsden,” says Seumas.
“Now, now brother, we’ve agreed that we must abolish the public school practice of calling people by their surname. Comrade Marsden, it is really very simple. We want a new customs union and a close single market relationship,” says Jeremy.
“Staying in the customs union and single market, got it,” I say, pleased with myself.
A customs union, not the customs union; close to the single market, not in it! What is wrong with you?” shouts Seumas.
“But…” I try to protest.
“Having secured the Labour Withdrawal Agreement, we will then put that to the people in a referendum with Remain as the other option,” explains Jeremy.
“But we will be neutral on Brexit in the election and then after the election we will convene a special meeting of the party to decide whether we want to Remain or Leave,” says Seumas.
“Will that meeting be before or after making a deal with the EU?” I ask, trying to keep up.
“Sorry?” asks Jeremy.
“Will the special party conference, be before or after you negotiate a deal to leave the European Union? You see if it’s before and we all agree to Remain, why are we negotiating a deal to Leave? If it’s after and we all agree to leave on the basis of our deal, why are we having a referendum?” I ask, thinking I’ve got the gist of this.
“Oh, I see,” says Jeremy.
“That’s a good point,” says Seumas.
“Obviously, the conference will be before the negotiation,” says Jeremy.
“No, after the negotiation,” says Seumas.
“Maybe it should be before the election,” I suggest, trying to be helpful.
Seamus scowls, “This is the conference before the election,” he says.
“And what have we decided?” I say.
“Let me start again, we are in favour of a second referendum…” begins Jeremy. This could take some time.

Wednesday

What a turnaround, back in Westminster after the Supreme Court has ruled that the government’s prorogation of parliament was unlawful. In the tea room I bump into education secretary Gavin Williamson.

“Bet you regret saying that now,” I say to him.
“What?” he asks.
“Writing to the Office for Students telling them to carry on with the Teaching Excellence Framework next year,” I say.
“Why?” he asks.
“Because it is a legal requirement of Shirley Pearce’s independent review that it must be presented to and debated in parliament before any further decisions are made about the TEF. The Supreme Court’s ruling was all about executive overreach,” I explain.
“Look Gordon, I’ve got some seriously heavy people on my case,” he whispers to me.
“You too?” I say, looking about.
“They’ll stop at nothing,” he says, “they have a fanatical devotion to this thing and they want to see it succeed at all costs.”
“A no-deal Brexit?” I say in a hushed tone.
“No, the TEF,” he says, looking over his shoulder, “Johnson won’t stop going on about it.”
“Damn Boris,” I say.
“No, it’s Jo! He phones me about it every five minutes, says Williamson.
I sigh and walk off.

Thursday

After a stormy session in the chamber last night, I have a meeting in Portcullis House this morning.

“I just think you should moderate your language,” I say.
“Why should we,” says one of my guests.
“They deserve all they get,” says another.
“I don’t think it’s helpful and it’s creating further division,” I explain.
“What’s wrong with telling it like it is,” says the first guest.
“They don’t like it when we throw it back at them,” says the other.
“We all need to calm down and find common ground,” I tell them.
“No way, we are not backing down. They started this, and we will fight to the end,” says one.
“I just think “no detriment, no capitulation” is not sustainable in the end. Sooner or later you will need to come to a compromise over contribution rates to the Universities Superannuation Scheme,” I tell my guests from the University and College Union.
“Traitor!” says one.
“Whose side are you on, Gordon?” says the other.
I sigh and pour another cup of tea.

Friday

Back in Blackpool I get a call from Angela Rayner. She sounds down.

“I don’t know what they are thinking of,” she says.
“They did try to explain it to me, but it’s so confusing no one will understand it,” I say.
“It will be very unpopular in universities,” she says.
“It takes forever to explain, and in the end, people just say, why are we doing this?” I say.
“It’s a complete waste of taxpayers’ money, and it’s going to make the divisions and inequality even worse than before” she complains.
“I know, but that’s the Knowledge Exchange Framework for you,” I tell her.
“So remind me, all universities are divided into groups and the winners from each group go on to compete against each other?” she asks.
“No, that’s the Champions League, Angela,” I say. This might take some time.

Terms of reference: this is a free email for fun on a Friday afternoon, it should circulate widely like a digital skills grant application among close friends of the prime minister. Want a flowchart explanation of Labour’s Brexit position or the KEF? Email ivorytower@researchresearch.com