Labour: You’re doing it right

I have touched on the problems of the rail industry on this blog before and the whole area surrounding Privatisation vs. Nationalisation. Well I think to someone in the Labour party may have been listening. We have a policy! And it’s crackin’ good un’ at that. An effective re-nationalise the Rail industry.

To remind you why this is such a cracking idea, here’s some reasons why:

1. The UK already has the most expensive rail fares out of any European nation
2. The UK is the only nation in Europe not to have a nationalised rail industry
3. UK rail users pay 10 times that of their Italian counterparts
4. The UK already subsidises Virgin by £1.4 billion (a company that should not receive a penny in my books)
5. For those who say Privatisation leads to better organisation, think again
6. Estimates figure that £1.2bn of public money has been lost each year as a direct result of privatisation and fragmentation, money that could have allowed fares to be 18% lower than at present.

In a nutshell, Privatisation has indeed failed for the rail industry. There’s no real ‘choice’. If I want to get a train from Birmingham New Street to Manchester Picadilly I can only go via CrossCountry and if I want to get a train from Birmingham New Street to London Euston I can only go via Virgin trains.

As a semi-regular train user, this is a brilliant step in the right direction for Labour and the rail industry. Hell extend it to Buses as well!

A nasty authoritarian streak

I’m going to say this now and nip it in the bud, I’m no fan of the Blairite think-tank Progress. But ultimately, this post is not on the ideological flaws and merits of Progress and any personal problems I have with the think-tank. This post is about the continuation of plurality within the Labour party.

In the last week, the Trade Union, GMB, called for the expulsion of Progress as an affiliate organisation to the Labour party. Now whatever you may think of Progress this is indeed a nasty authoritarian streak by the GMB leadership. The Labour party has always prided itself on being a broad church and it’s only through open and fair debate within the party that we can come to a united progressive/social democratic/socialist agreement and movement. Yes, I’ll admit in the last twenty years or so this open debate and communication between different segments of the party has often subdued or ignored. But as a party pluralist and a man of consensus this is the ideal way forward.

If GMB is really not a fan of Progress, how about an open and honest dialogue to attempt to come to a common agreement or even to persuade members of any ideological flaws they may have.

We are stronger united as a Labour party and yet we are still entirely capable of having our own internal disagreements and discussion. Childishly excluding segments of the party will only take steps to further alienate ‘factions’ and even lessen our electability.

The pressure mounts

With inflation around 5%, consumer confidence falling for four months on the trot, business confidence falling to a two year low, growth flat-lining in the past 9 months and growth expectations themselves being cut, you would have thought Gideon (George) Osborne would think things could not get any worse.

Well apparently they can. It seems 100 leading economists have written into the Observer to tell Gideon to adopt a plan B. Now while letters like this have been done in the past, the difference being that this time it has an alternative outline. It’s an alternative Miliband and Balls should take head to:

1. An immediate halt to cuts, to protect jobs in the public sector. (Although I wouldn’t not cut entirely, for one, I’d cut the renewal of Trident).
2. A new round of quantitative easing but the money wouldn’t go to the banks. Rather to finance a “Green New Deal” to create thousands of new jobs.
3. Benefit increases to put money into the pockets of those on lower and middle incomes and give a boost to spending.
4. A financial transaction tax to raise funds from the City to pay for investment in transport, energy and house building. (Robin Hood Tax anyone?)
5. Introduce a truly progressive tax system so that those at the bottom don’t face the greatest burden proportionately (Or simply having the rich pay their taxes will be a start)
6. Introduce a tax on land value to increase revenue and reduce the possibility of another debt-fuelled housing price boom.
7. Copy South Korea and China’s model of state assistance for industry by creating a British investment bank. (Something that Lord Mandelson was beginning to champion in the last year of the Labour Government)
8. Invest in transport and infrastructure to create jobs, but also to encourage people out of their cars and into trains or on to bicycles
9. Judge the economy not on whether there is growth in GDP, but on a new catch-all criterion that takes into account the desire for minimal unemployment, and for work-life balance, economic and social stability, and job satisfaction.

So Gideon, even though we know you wont, please take heed of the recommendations. Simply living in the nostalgia of a failed plan of the early 1980s wont guarantee success. And Miliband and Balls, these recommendations should be the essence of your policy review, take them on board!

And who says we don’t have policies

Back in 2008 the Institute of Fiscal Studies concluded that the 2.5% cut in VAT that year was an effective tax-cutting stimulus measure particularly for consumers. Now since the welcome rise in retail spending by 1.1% in April there has been a complete reversal of that fortune with retail spending dropping by 1.4% in May. In the light of the recent figures (yup we can flexible, unlike some) Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls has called on for an emergency tax cut and another repeat of the one off tax on Bankers bonuses to raise £2bn of which most would go towards creating 25,000 affordable homes which is still a pressing problem after a decade of rising house prices.

Now this is quite important as much as I personally am a fan of the two Eds, we do need to create a very very broad economic narrative before the policy review is completed. And this is a good and welcome first step.

Old news

Right this had to be cleared up. As you probably know the Telegraph recently published leaked documents on Ed Balls’ role in the Gordon Brown’s camps attempt to oust Blair. It seems from the documents that Balls was a primary agitator in the attempts to demand a leaving date from Blair and presenting Brown as a Prime Minister in waiting……..well is any of this new? Of course not! Will it effect his ability to do his job as Shadow Chancellor? Again, of course not! Will it mean Balls will follow a similar path to his former master, Brown and attempt to oust Ed Miliband? Of course not as unlike Blair and Brown, Balls and Miliband actually ran against each other in the leadership election which was conclusively resolved (if you exclude disgruntled sore-loser supporters of David Miliband). And frankly, Labour is far beyond the petty squabbles of the Blair-Brown and is a largely united force unlike after losing power in the 1950s and 1980s. So all of this is totally irrelevant, we have moved on.

There’s also accusations that Balls alongside Brown ignored warnings and continued spending increases well above inflation and so further created a deficit before the crash of 2008. Come off it! These claims were directed around the year of 2006….when Balls was merely a back-bench MP. Of course you have to remember this is coming from the Telegraph and these claims have jumped on by particularly Michael Gove. This is all very well, but Gove fails to mention that Gideon was committed rigorously to Labour’s spending plans up until the 2008 crash and that on the eve of the 2008 crash Brown had a lower deficit than he had inherited back in 1997 as Chancellor.

Stagflation

Growth stalling, inflation rising and unemployment rising, for all the Tories comparison themselves and 1979 coming in “to clean up Labour’s mess”, it seems this government more reflects the 1970s than did Labour. Now, I’m wise enough (I hope) to recognise that this ‘stagflation’ is not due to the cuts (as they are still yet to take fully effect yet) but rather the ending of Darling’s economic stimulus.

Up until the growth figures came out last month I personally very much doubted that the UK would actually slip into a full blown double-dip recession, but rather ‘bump along the bottom’. Since these figures have been produced, I fear there is a very good chance now. If this continues and even if worsens when the cuts bite (which I have a feeling they will do) Labour will have the sad duty of saying “don’t say we didn’t warn you” as throughout the election we campaigned to keep investment in the economy until 2011. But, I hope for the sake of the people of Britain, that day never comes.

 

Labour now has the Balls

Now, I’m not going to focus on Alan Johnson, Suzy has already dealt with that, but I just like to say he’ll be surely missed from the front-line politics.

Anyway, we move onto Johnson’s successor, Ed Balls. Now to many Tories, they will regard this as a late Christmas present. The well oiled Tory party machine has already been making well-directed attacks towards Gordon Brown’s former chief economic’s adviser and playing at his past which was so intertwined with the Blair-Brown feud. Yes, Balls was a major figure during the feuds, but as a wise Baboon once said “Oh yes, de past can hurt. But the way I see it you can either run from it, or learn from it.” (the wise Baboon being Rafiki from the Lion King……..BULS draws wisdom from many walks of life). Yes, Balls’ part in the feud was from his finest hour and many of the economic policies did contribute to the financial crisis (will come back to the latter part later). But, this is a time for Balls in particular to shape his own image and reputation. As Shadow Chancellor, with his deep knowledge of economics, he will be able to establish at least a broad thinking idea of Labour’s alternative and most likely rip Gideon to shreds in the process (I particularly like the idea of the latter).

With growth beginning to slow, inflation and unemployment rising, there has been no better time to be an “attack dog”. But the Tory-led Coalition is quick point out the failures of economic policy Labour made. We did make great progress under ‘New’ Labour, but we also made grave mistakes. But, to counter the Tory-party machine, we do need strong responses in order as well as humility about our record. When Cameron (or indeed anyone) criticises Labour failing to regulate the banks, quote back Gideon and Cameron’s years of calling for further de-regulation. And when Cameron claims Labour’s spending caused the deficit, don’t forget to remind them that Conservative spending policies before the 2008 crash would have rigidly stuck to Labour’s. The Tory-lead Coalition’s deceit cannot last forever and hopefully, Ed Balls can dispel the rhetoric as soon as.

Oldham result

Well the results are in and yes, the most important point of the night, Labour has kept Oldham red. With a 48% turnout (down on May’s 61%) the results are as follows:

Labour – 42.1% of the vote (31.9% in May)

Liberal Democrats – 31.9% (31.6%)

Conservatives – 12.8% (26.4%)

UKIP – 5.8% (3.9%)

BNP – 4.8% (5.7%)

So the first good result you can see (apart from Labour winning) is that the BNP lost its deposit, always a good thing. But without a doubt the most notable result of the night was the complete collapse of the Conservative vote, yes, third parties are always squeezed, especially in by-elections, but not to this extent. A 14% slump in the vote is rather unheard of, leading to a 11% swing from Tory to Labour (a swing I could very easily get used to). It seems that a combination of tactical voting and a half-hearted campaign by CCHQ, despite insistence otherwise, is going to mean DC will have some stuff questions to answered by from his backbenchers.

Also, great to note that Labour’s majority in Oldham (3558) is now higher than it was in 1997, during Labour’s peak.

Oldham thoughts

Given I’m one of BULS’s token few Northerners, I though it would be appropriate to have a blog on the upcoming by-election. Cautious confidence is probably the best way to describe Oldham East and Saddleworth. Already we have seen a number of polls from ICM and Populus showing Labour having a around 17% lead over the Lib Dems (with a surprising slump in support for the Tories). However, another  polling company, Survation, has recorded the Labour leader being 1&(!!). Labour are the bookies favourite to win, but, I cannot stress any less without doubt, not to slacked the momentum. This is the first time in yearsthat the Lib Dems wont be all masterful in by-elections.

Throughout the entire campaign the Lib Dem candidate and Cleggy have been emphasising that this by-election is about selecting a new local MP. I’d have to agree that this is what it ought to be about, but since when have by-elections ever been about local issues?

Max

Labour’s year

2010 has been one hell of a hectic year for Labour, nationally and locally. So here’s my review of the year.

So in early 2010 we began with a very slowly (and I mean slowly) improving position (the polls were very slowly narrowing and Brown was beginning to perform a bit better at PMQs). People were beginning to actually question and analyse Tory policy (much to the latter’s own shock).

But of course, we remember the attempted Coup on Brown (http://bulsonline.org/2010/01/06/coup-dstupid/), the less said about that final attempted revolt the better. But apart from that the majority of the first few months of 2010 were focused upon the Tories incomplete and ill thought out policies which were actually being looked at now (again, much to the Tory’s shock). Unfortunately though, Labour failed to properly capitalise upon DC’s inconsistency over marriage-tax breaks, the level of the cuts and even the Lord Ashcroft scandal, etc.

Now I’m not going to lie, despite not exactly being an expert at election campaigns, Labour’s performance in the 2010 campaign was not exactly brilliant. Admittedly, we  didn’t have an Ashcroft of our own, but a daily press conference chaired by Peter Mandelson is not a way to woo the public. Moving onto the leadership debates, apart from the first one, Brown’s performances could have been much worse. He undoubtedly was the most policy detailed, but unfortunately, you need more than sound policy to win Televised debates.

The result that followed was no where near as anyone might have expected a year or two ago. Don’t be deluded though, in terms of share of the vote, Labour’s result was far from satisfactory, with our second worse result since the 1920s. In terms of seats we didn’t do too badly though. But, given that a year or two ago we were literally facing oblivion on a Tory 1997 scale (regularly behind in the polls by 20%+ in 2008 and 10%+ leads in 2009) was nothing less than a complete and utter failure on the part of the Conservatives. Labour locally also managed to retain Selly Oak and most surprising of all, Edgbaston, much to everyone shock (including my own if I’m being honest). Labour also made significant gains in the local elections nationally and slashing the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition in Birmingham Council to a wafer thin majority.

But ultimately, we couldn’t hold onto power, the numbers didn’t add up and the Lib Dems had already decided that they were moving to the Tories. And so ended 13 years of ‘New’ Labour. But, life had to move on and so began the process to replace Gordon Brown. I’m not going to lie, to the wider public, the election wasn’t the most inspiring and enthralling one ever seen and I personally had no love for any of the candidates at the start.

Of course, we all know what happened next. Probably one of the biggest political upsets of the past few years. After being tipped as Brown’s obvious future successor, David Miliband or Miliband the Elder, was pipped by his brother at what seemed to be the final post (quite literally, Miliband the younger became favourite on the very last day). This seems what happens when you underestimate Miliband the younger, you in the end regret you ever did. One of the definite features of Miliband the elder not winning was that the era ‘New’ Labour was finally brought to a close with most notably the Iraq war being deemed wrong. Of course, there has been apparent glee from the Tory ranks that ‘Red-Ed’ is a godsend. But, as mentioned before, be careful not to underestimate your opponents.

But of course, what now you may ask? Without a shred of doubt, Labour does need to formalise a coherent and well though out plan for it’s vision. But, we should be careful not to make the mistakes DC made when he became Tory leader. While DC did a lot to detoxify the image of the Conservative party (hug a hoody, huskies in Norway, etc), he very much failed to change the nature of the Conservative party, which ultimately cost him a landslide victory. Consequently, it’s the long and apparently slow road of renewal for Labour. But come 2015, get ready for the real change and the true optimists of British politics!

Max