Uncut « Labour Uncut

After the London mayoral election, Labour has a new campaign rule book

04/05/2012, 07:00:47 AM

by Jonathan Roberts

In March I wrote an open letter to Ken Livingstone – where I promised to abstain from the mayoral election. It is a promise I kept, but for the avoidance of doubt, I proudly voted Labour for the London Assembly.

Now, the 2012 election campaign has drawn to a close. As a consequence of the hard work of countless Labour activists, we have seen hundreds of new Labour councillors elected as a sign that Labour is back, its reputation making good progress down the road of recovery. From Plymouth to Birmingham, new Labour councils will help make a difference across the country.

It is a physical manifestation not just of the unpopularity of this Government, but also of Ed Miliband’s improving leadership – a vindication of the belief that Labour is most in touch with the needs of ordinary people in difficult times.

But there is a moral threat already placed upon this welcome return to Labour’s electoral competitiveness, because the London mayoral election has changed the game of political campaigning forever.

There was once an unwritten rule book, a code of conduct that governed Labour activity to ensure high standards of integrity and consistency were met. Labour activists have always claimed a higher moral standard, and revelled in holding the supposed immorality of our opponents to account. But we now have a hypocrisy problem.

It is truly dreadful that we have a Conservative prime minister willing to make discriminatory attacks on the basis of age. But apparently it is righteous and just to support discriminatory “posh-boy” attacks on the basis of class.

It is disgraceful that Conservative policies attack the disabled. But apparently it is fair and appropriate for Labour to mock a Conservative MP because of his cerebral palsy.

Hypocrisy can be seen by all but those who choose to be blind.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 22 Comments »

In praise of…local councillors

03/05/2012, 07:00:24 AM

by Peter Watt

It’s a big test today for all of the parties. London and Glasgow will be watched particularly closely but so will the results from Derby, Plymouth, Southampton, Harlow, Norwich and, well you get the point! Will Labour get more than 700 gains? Will the Tories lose more than 300?

Will the Liberal Democrats go into meltdown? Clever people will talk about the impact of the ‘omnishambles’ of the News International scandal and the budget on the Tory vote.

There will be a debate about whether there is evidence that Ed Miliband is convincing voters that he is more than David’s brother and is edging towards Downing Street. The results will all be scrutinised and analysed for their national significance. But to be honest this inevitable focus on the national is a shame because it masks the individual battles and hard work of thousands and thousands of local candidates across the Country.

I once stood for election to Poole borough council. I came within 54 votes of winning what had been a safe Tory ward. But to be honest with hindsight I am glad I didn’t win! Being a councillor is just too much like hard work for my liking! In fact at a time when politics is held in such low regard, local government is a beacon of hope.

Local councillors are the unsung heroes of the political world. They are often part-time holding down a job as well as carrying out their council work. Yes they get allowances, but they are hardly paid a fortune. And for their allowances they are incredibly good value. The endless lists of committees and panels, school governors and board meetings, the residents’ panels, full council meetings and group meetings. This merry-go-round of public service is often interminably boring but really quite important and frankly someone has attend!

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 6 Comments »

We need to send the Tories packing

02/05/2012, 02:38:08 PM

by Siôn Simon

Fifteen years ago the country went to the polls, cast their vote for Labour and sent a message to the incumbent Tory government. People said: we won’t be treated like this; we won’t be lied to, conned, taken for granted; asked to work harder for less, while the rich get richer; we don’t want hand outs, but sometimes we need a hand up. And Labour voters delivered that message and sent the Tories packing.

But they came back.

It didn’t take long for David Cameron’s mask to slip, or for them to reverse the work of the last Labour government. Snatching tax credits away from millions of working families, scrapping the education maintenance allowance, increasing tuition fees and, with Osborne at the wheel, driving the country back in to recession.

Tomorrow we have another opportunity to send a clear message to the Tories and their Liberal Democrat houseboys that we won’t stand for their lies, cozy kitchen suppers, daily updates with media barons and shambolic handling of the economy. In polling booths up and down the country people have the chance to tell David Cameron and George Osborne exactly what they think of them.

The local elections aren’t just about individual communities, they are a report card on this government. Whether it be in Birmingham, where the Tory and Lib Dem controlled council has done nothing to support, speak up or stand up for our city against their central Government cronies cuts. Or in London where Boris Johnson has done nothing to help the woman on the street but managed to find time to campaign for tax cuts for his wealthy mates. We need to send the message.

Because if we don’t kick them out of power in Birmingham, if we don’t send Boris packing in London, then Cameron and Osborne will think they can get away with it. That they can keep looking after the few and make life harder for the many.

The message to wavering Londoners is clear: it doesn’t matter whether you like Ken. You need Ken. Because you can’t afford Boris. He is an out-of-touch playboy who has taken Londoners for a ride, and charged you 50% more for your bus trip on the way.

Ken has an unparalleled track record of putting ordinary Londoners first. Now, of all times, that is what London needs.

In Birmingham, eight years of Tory-Lib Dem misrule – during which they never won the popular vote – has devastated our city. They have attacked our must vulnerable people with disabilities. Twice their cuts have been found to be illegal. The fight back for ordinary Brummies needs to start tomorrow.

We must show them that we won’t stand for it – we won’t be made mugs of by these privileged chancers. We need to stand up and tell them no. Enough is enough. We want our great cities back.

There’s only one way to send this message: vote Labour on Thursday, vote Ken and vote Yes in Birmingham’s Mayoral referendum.

Siôn Simon is running to be the first directly elected Mayor of Birmingham

Posted in Uncut | 20 Comments »

The double-dip, if it is one, has not changed the rules of the game

02/05/2012, 07:00:17 AM

by Rob Marchant

Delight, for many on the left, met the economic figures last Wednesday. Britain was not in recovery after all, but was the victim of a double-dip recession. Paul Krugman wrote eloquently of Britain’s “death spiral of self-defeating austerity”, and Ed Balls had a very good day.

All true, or very likely so, although one cannot know for sure, Balls and Darling seem to have been closer to the mark, and Krugman is usually a pretty shrewd observer.

Balls’ argument is looking considerably stronger than it did and, in parliamentary terms, as Dan Hodges puts it, he “put George Osborne on the canvass” . So this is the start of Labour’s long road back, right, now we have fixed our economic credibility problem?

Ah, would that it were that simple. Where we might want to differ from the good Hodges is when he says that “Balls has won”. He has not. Labour has not. For a number of reasons: but most already known. Stephen Beer, a fund manager, warns at Progress that we have not done “enough to restore economic credibility for Labour”, and he’s right.

But it is more than that. Even if we can make a convincing argument, in the court of public opinion, for being cleared of economic incompetence, there are a half-dozen other charges which it will surely want taken into consideration.

First, as Hamish McRae points out in the Independent , government predictions have underestimated GDP by half a per cent, on average, over the last ten years. So we may well not actually be in recession at all after the figures are corrected.

Indeed, the insightful McRae goes as far as to predict that the “doomsayers will be proved wrong” on the basis of some alternative figures from Goldman Sachs. Not conclusive, but enough to make us hesitate.

Second, the Tories being proved wrong is not the same as Labour being proved right. We do not know for sure what might have happened, had Darling or Balls been Chancellor instead of Osborne. Neither can we even explain in detail what we would have done: while we have specified a level of cuts, we have not yet said where we would have cut, which of course could affect outcomes.

So Labour might have done just as badly, or worse. We do not know and, besides, the game of alternative histories is rarely one which moves voters.

Also Beer writes correctly that, on top of this, we need to get back credibility with the financial markets, where we currently seem to be doing our best, via our “predators versus producers” talk, to alienate them.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 23 Comments »

One example of what’s wrong with British journalism

01/05/2012, 07:30:10 AM

by Peter Goddard

Yesterday’s Guardian featured the ‘shocking’ news that staff on P&O Cruises will not be paid tips directly, but will receive a bonus related to performance.

The headline for this story makes great hay from the staff in question being paid just 75p an hour. Below the line, the audience is outraged, with much Cameron-bashing and righteous left wing scorn denouncing these ‘slave wages’.

But if we actually read the article rather than simply scandalise ourselves with the headline, a more complex story emerges.

The staff in question hail from India and the Philippines, not the UK.

And they work on boats in international waters, not the UK.

So, non-British employees working in a non-British location are paid wages that, by British standards, are very low. This seems rather less scandalous.

Assuming the cruise company provides their staff with room and board (and this is just one of the relevant facts that the article does not provide), the value of the 75p an hour wage bears no relation to the buying power of that money in Europe and therefore tells us very little about how well or badly these workers are being treated.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 10 Comments »

The polling that explains why Ed Miliband is right to lead on Hunt

30/04/2012, 07:00:04 AM

by Atul Hatwal

What’s the best attack on the Tories? For Ed Miliband, the fate of Jeremy Hunt has been the priority, apparently at the expense of highlighting the return of recession.

Commentators from all sides of the left have been critical: most voters already think all politicians are far too close to the media barons. The Hunt affair only confirms this and expending valuable political time on the intricacies of the Ministerial code instead of hammering home Tory failure on the recession totally misses the point.

It’s an understandable view. But wrong.

Jeremy Hunt is small fry. This issue is actually about leadership, David Cameron’s and Ed Miliband’s.

If the Labour leader has a single task to achieve before the next election, he must to narrow the gap with David Cameron on who the voters prefer as prime minister.

To understand the scale of challenge, it’s worth reflecting on a salutary fact: at the last general election on May 3^rd, YouGov surveyed people on their preference for prime minister. Gordon Brown was the choice of 26% with David Cameron on 32%. In the nineteen months of his leadership, across 40 polls, Ed Milband has never bettered Gordon Brown’s dismal benchmark.

Huntgate gives Miliband an opportunity to help change the way that the public looks at him, and David Cameron.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 7 Comments »

The Sunday review: “Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosperity and poverty” by Daron Acemoglu and James A Robinson

29/04/2012, 08:00:44 AM

by Anthony Painter

In 1978, workers at the Scania factory in Sao Paulo went on strike in protest at the Government manipulating the rate of inflation meaning they were worse off than they had thought. Strikes had been illegal in Brazil since 1964. The metalworker union’s president was called in to convince the workers to return to work. He refused. Brazil’s long march to economic and political freedom had begun. The president’s name? Luiz Inatio Lula da Silva – “Lula”.

Critical to Daron Acemoglu and James A Robinson’s Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosperity and poverty is the notion that these events in 1978 are connected to today’s Brazilian prosperity. Their central argument is that prosperity is generated through inclusive political and economic institutions. They reinforce each other. A pluralistic political system tends to support private property, encourages investment and innovation, creates a level-playing field and prevents elites from extracting too much wealth. As long as you have sufficient centralisation to enable the rule of law, these are the circumstances in which nations develop and poverty is diminished.

Lula was part of a broad civic movement for democracy and social justice. Over time this movement enhanced pluralism within Brazil’s political system and cracked open its economy. The first local administration to be run by the Workers’ Party, Porto Alegre, introduced ‘participatory budgeting’ which consulted residents about spending priorities. Inclusive political institutions promote inclusive economic institutions which unleash creative destruction against privilege and monopoly.

The great trust-buster, Teddy Roosevelt, confronted the ‘Robber barons’ in the early twentieth century. He was responding to popular concern with their market power. America’s institutions enabled this transmission from popular discontent to action. The same would be less likely to happen in Yemen.

Two things distinguish Why nations fail the simplicity of its argument and the sheer range and scope of historical references. Acemoglu and Robinson cover the Roman Empire, the history of Ethiopia, Congo, Bolivia, Peru, Japan, India, China, Austria and many more.

They devote considerable attention to a small European nation called England. Our divergent path came through the colonisation of north America which emboldened a merchant class to insist on political reform. It all came to a head in the Glorious Revolution of 1688.

Acemoglu and Robinson are particularly adept at comparing starkly diverging destinies of seemingly similar locations that have been taken in different institutional directions: Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora; North and South Korea; the Bushong and Lele of Kongo; north and south London. OK, they don’t include north and south London but you get the picture.

The book is staggering, accessible but not without flaws. Its core thesis does become quite repetitive and this breaks its pace from time to time.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 6 Comments »

More than anything else, this government lacks purpose

27/04/2012, 08:00:56 AM

by Pat McFadden

Last week I wrote that competence or the lack of it had become a key problem for the government. A number of issues were responsible, beginning with the unnecessary government provoked petrol crisis and running up to the farcical inability of the home office to add up the number of days in three months when trying to deport Abu Qatada. All of this means that politics is being looked at through a different lens compared with a couple of months ago.

This different context in which the government is no longer getting the benefit of the doubt lies behind the recent shift away from the Conservatives and towards Labour in recent opinion polls.

But this week, something even more serious than government competence came into question. It is the government’s purpose. If the coalition had one purpose it was supposed to be “sorting out” the economy through fiscal austerity. There isn’t a debate or question time that goes by in the House of Commons without some reference to this from government ministers. It’s the glue that holds the Tories and Liberals together – all that stuff about “sorting out Labour’s mess” and “working together in the national interest.”

Except it isn’t working. The economy is back in recession. All those Cameron and Osborne quotes about the economy being out of the danger zone look hopelessly, as the phrase of our times puts it, out of touch.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 22 Comments »

A Spanish economics lesson for Scottish independence

26/04/2012, 02:54:10 PM

by David Mathieson

It is ironic that just as the nationalist government in Scotland is churning the ground in preparation for a referendum on independence or ‘devo max’, another European country, Spain, is actively considering at ways of reining in a decentralised state.

The administrative system in Spain is one of the most highly devolved of any country in the EU and the wide range of powers exercised by the powerful regions or autonomias has long provided something of a model for the SNP.

Yet, with their economy under pressure, the costs of ultra-devolution are being increasingly questioned by Spaniards themselves. Some regions are close to bankruptcy whilst the leaders of others are would like to throw in the towel and revert to a more centralised state. A new political debate has opened up in which many ordinary Spaniards are openly asking ‘what is the point of further devolution – and is it worth the price?’

The 17 Spanish autonomias are generally responsible for the organisation and delivery of key public services such as health, education and justice and these alone account for some 80% of average regional spending.

The funding comes from a mixture of central and regional government revenues although not all regions enjoy the same spending powers nor do they raise revenue in the same way. The founding fathers of the post-Franco constitution decreed that whilst the pace of devolution would be determined by local needs the eventual goal should be a uniform provision of services or what the Spanish have dubbed café para todos or ‘coffee for everyone’.

A noble aim maybe, but in the meantime the mishmash of services can be confusing – even the most enthusiastic advocates of the system admit that there are failures of coordination – and it is costly.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 10 Comments »

Why on earth are we even talking about Lords reform?

26/04/2012, 07:45:35 AM

by Peter Watt

I have been building up to write this for days now. Because I have been getting angrier and angrier the more I thought about it – House of Lords reform.

What is it that politicians don’t understand here? Voters hardly hold their political masters in the highest regard. Not to put too fine a point on it, they don’t like politicians and certainly do not value them. It may or may not be unfair but they think that politicians are self-serving and live in their own rarefied world.

What voters certainly do not see is a political system that provides a solution to the problems that they experience in their day-to-day lives. In fact many voters are angry and probably blame politicians for many of the world’s ills. To be fair, from the voters point of view there is much to feel angry about. The expenses scandal; an economic crisis that the political class seems immune from; tax cuts for their mates, tax rises for everyone else and ever increasing prices.

And the response of our politicians? That we need even more politicians!

Apparently we need to expend huge amounts of political energy and effort passing legislation that will create 450 new professional politicians. Presumably all of whom will need paying, will need staff, offices and expenses. Who will need to be elected and who will all need to spend their time justifying their existence.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 16 Comments »