Labour
Struggling with its Past
It
was almost a shambles as Labour tried to re-position itself in
relation to the national budget/austerity and welfare. Liam Byrne on
the Sunday Politics (BBC 1 9th
June 2013) was opaque to the point of complete obscurity - he seemed
not to have been fully briefed this applies to a number of other MPs
when asked (McGovern [Wirral South] Daily Politics 10th June). Smacks
of someone not quite sure what is being done nor why!!
Is
re-positioning necessary? Given the political timescales that operate
in our system the answer is very probably yes plus the pressure the
media has been putting on Labour these past few weeks to come up with
some concrete policies. This, in part, is a reflection of the success
of the Government in portraying Labour as perennially negative as to
reform and therefore not capable of dealing with the real issues of
budget and austerity. In addressing the issues many would wish that
an approach which drew a more complete picture rather than ad-hoc
adjustments to existing positions would help. But we are where we are
and now it has to be dealt with.
Dealing
with the points above as to why and what. The repositioning is
necessary as the General Election is less than 2 years away. Clearly
the overhang of blame (partial if not wholly, depending on your
personal balance of objectivity versus prejudice) has not been washed
away (take note Mr Balls) else Labour's lead in the Opinion Polls
would be in the upper teens not bouncing along at 5%. And it is not
only the polls - just talk to people they know the score - most of
them have lived through it unlike many in the shelter of Westminster
and Whitehall!
What
to do about the budget deficit? Despite what we might wish for there
does appear to be resistance to annual public expenditure exceeding
more than 40% of GDP (in normal times and in the UK {for a different
take look at Sweden}). Money Lenders (for that is what the Bond
Markets do) have regard to that figure although politicians can
engender or destroy confidence at the slip of the tongue. I am not
saying I support this way of doing things - it is the way things are
and likely to be so for many years to come. So the deficit has to
come down and (football chant) "We all agree reduce the
deficit". However simply reducing expenditure in a random way
can lead to what Civil Servants politely call un-planned for outcomes
e.g. reducing some benefits will reduce income and therefore spending
will decrease which in itself will hold back growth which means a
greater demand for some benefits - a downward spiral. Some reductions
e.g. Disability Allowances where the cost of the additional
administration (greater and more rigorous assessments) exceeds
expected savings by a factor of at least 50. This is of course nasty
politics by the government because if anyone had to be blamed for the
financial situation it is not those on disability. Not only is it
nasty but it is stupid - they usually go hand in hand. So deciding
what is not at all easy. All the more reason to have a growth
strategy combined with deficit reduction. Which brings me to getting
people to support what you might wish to do. Overwhelmingly people
(when asked about benefit recipients) dislike the apparent non
contribution that they make. This has to be addressed! It is the main
way in which Labour can reclaim credibilty for its 'welfarism'. This
principle of definite contribution means that some form of "workfare"
has to be introduced. However this can only be the case where the NMW
is vigorously enforced and the "Living Wage" becomes
adopted widely. Many in Labour will dislike that idea in which case
they will have to seek a more electorally successful policy if it
exists. Additionally measures to ensure the proper payment of tax
(including a Wealth Tax) by corporations and individuals have to go
hand in hand with the restructuring of welfare. Labour must also make
clear which parts of the welfare budget are sacrosanct and which are
not.
Allowing
the media to pick ad hoc which policies to discuss is (and always has
been) lazy communication. Time for careful thought and much better
preparation!
Resources
used:
BBC
2 Daily Politics
BBC
1 Sunday Politics
Independent
8,10,11 June 2013
Sunday
Telegraph 9 June 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment