Nick Clegg offered the most implausible of explanations as to why the Institute for Fiscal Studies analysis of the budget which they have categorically branded as regressive was wrong. He sai the measures were progressive if the ConDems plans to get people off benefits were taken into account.
The reality is the ConDems plan is to create 4 million unemployed.
Faisal Islam tore the claim by Clegg apart at Channel 4.
And as my Green New Deal colleague Larry Elliott says this morning at the Guardian:
For years, Lib Dems have banged on about how the two architects of postwar Labour Britain — Keynes and Beveridge — were both Liberals. One can only imagine what those 20th-century giants would say about policies that increase unemployment, unravel the welfare state, hit the poor harder than the rich, and provide political cover for a rightwing government intent on turning the clock back to the early 80s.
So, if those Lib Dems who take pride in being on the progressive wing of politics find the IFS assessment uncomfortable reading, then tough; they need to feel bad about the policies they are backing. And they had better prepare for a lot more ordure when the austerity policies really bite next year. They should also be worried about the US economy, which — unencumbered by budget cuts — is on the brink of a double-dip recession.
That said, Larry’s right too that Labour really does need a narrative now.
A narrative that says just why it believes in the state and market working together to delver in combination the goods and services the people of this country need and want.
Clegg is not in that space. And he never will be again.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
The Libdems have made a terrible faustian bid – the leaders sold out their principles in return for a bigger stake (voting reform). There was always the risk that they would destroy themselves in the process – proportional representation will be worthless to them at the next election – tarnished with tory cuts and lacking any backbone to stand up for themselves they should be decimated by the labour party, and blamed, or at least held jointly responsible (even though it is quite evident that the partnership is not one of equals) for all the bad things that the Tory’s “had” to do.
If I was Cameron I would be looking to backhandedly destroy them by association. If I were the future labour leader, look to pick up disaffected Libdem voters (this is only possible now Brown has gone, but they really need a break from the TB/GB past – that rules out team Miliband and Mr Balls – really Diane Abbott is the best candidate by far, if you are looking for someone to look after the interests of the majority of people in this country).
The Libdems only hope (as a party) is to overthrow their party leady (not sure if this is possible) break up the coallition and force a new general election (maybe best to wait until a new labour leader has been chosen though. Then they can do a deal with Ms Abbott if necessary (who would make a far better partner for them
That would be the sensible thing to do IMHO
Nick Clegg is making himself look ridiculous with his totally illogical criticism of what is a very thorough and well-balanced analysis from the IFS. If he at least had the guts to say “I don’t care about inequality” in the way that Margaret Thatcher used to in the 1980s then it would mark him out as callous and inhumane but it would at least be honest.
Instead he makes staggering claims about how effective the DWP’s welfare to work policies will be! Well, good luck with that guys, when you are precipitating a double-dip recession with spending cuts, and when all the active labour market policy measures to get people back into work have been scrapped (e.g. Future Jobs Fund).
I think Clegg will be remembered as the worst Lib Dem leader ever – possibly the final Lib Dem leader, the way things are going.
My bet is on a split within the next 2 years and then we will have Lib Dems and “Progressive Liberals” or something like that – who may well do a deal with Labour after the next election.
I don’t think Diane Abbott has enough support to win the Labour leadership. David Miliband is probably incapable of breaking from the TB/GB past. But Ed Miliband MIGHT be able to.
My particular favourite argument in all this was “we’re cutting benefits but creating jobs – so it balances out”
Let just look at that
1) We know with certainty that they are cutting benefits, and benefits tend to go to the most needy in society. That is happening now.
2) They will be cutting corporation tax. What impact this has is yet to happen but the cuts phase in over several years
This is what we know
What they say this will cause is job creation due to private capital investment in the country.
The fact is we don’t know that this will attract foreign investment, and then that foreign investment will create jobs (admmittedly I would imagine it would – but there is no certainty here)
If it does it will take time before jobs are created (the poor in the mean time will somehow have to make do)
If and when the jobs are finally created, there is no guarantee that the jobs will be for the same people who have had their benefits taken away (I would imagine they would be the last to get jobs after all the other, more recently employed individuals are picked up).
This point is really important because if the jobs go to non-ex-benefit claimants then it is fundamentally unfair
Presumably in order to combat this particular issue the government would have to stipulate that the jobs created must go to the ex-benefit claimants, however given the neo-classical/ neo-liberal leanings of this government interfering with the market is never going to happen.
Of course, the more desperate the poor get, the less they will be willing to work for – keep an eye out for changes to the labour laws (minimum wages, flexibility of working, classification of eligibility of minimum wage etc etc etc).
Mr Clegg is a fairly smart chap – he must know all this. Could it be he thinks its a price worth paying in return for voting reform? Doesn’t he see it will destroy both him and the Libdems in the process
@Online Accountant
Re Labour leadership election. Yes, Diane Abbott is the only one who has clean hands and is a good communicator to boot. I now have to endorse Andy Burnham as my second choice (that’s it, then) because he has adopted our (Labour Land Campaign) policy of annual land value tax. This is despite the fact that I had ruled him out after I had met him and he confirmed he was for nuclear weapons. At the same meeting I told him about LVT, so I’m mighty pleased about his conversion.
If Diane gets selected, which is always possible given the voting system) I do hope she adopts John McDonnell’s LEAP – Another World is Possible. LEAP supports LVT too.
As a social democrat, I would never vote Tory, and, and found New Labour nearly as awful, given their capitulation to neoliberal idiocy; so I’ve always voted SDP, then LibDem.
And what do I see when they have power? Their leader backing up a Tory party that’s done nothing to punish the bankers and the wealthy tax dodgers for the damage they’ve caused, while using the excuse of ‘the deficit’ to attack the public sector and the less well off.
“The Libdems have made a terrible faustian bid – the leaders sold out their principles in return for a bigger stake (voting reform). There was always the risk that they would destroy themselves in the process – proportional representation will be worthless to them at the next election – tarnished with tory cuts and lacking any backbone to stand up for themselves they should be decimated by the labour party, and blamed, or at least held jointly responsible (even though it is quite evident that the partnership is not one of equals) for all the bad things that the Tory’s “had” to do.”
Exactly, Online, exactly.
This comment has been deleted. It failed the moderation policy noted here. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/comments/. The editor’s decision on this matter is final.
I simply can’t believe David Miliband would be much better than Cameron
If you want to get a measure of the man, look into the plight of the Chagosians (former inhabitants of Diego Garcia – the British ‘owned’ US leased US military base in the Indian Ocean.
Long ago we kicked them off their island under basically the threat of death with virtually no compensation to make way for the US military base.
The Chagosians appealed for proper compensation and won it in the high court and I believe, the house of lords. One would be mistaken to assume that this is the highest legal verdict in the land
This was overturned by David Miliband by an Order in Council, which basically short-cicuits all democratic institutions and goes straight to the Queen, who pretty much passes whatever she is told to by the members of the privy council
David Miliband, it would seem, is not really committed to democracy