On the day David Cameron gave his speech to the Conservative Party conference this October (the one where I was the butt of his jokes) I suggested to my wife that it wasn't worth getting worked up about his poor taste humour because, little did he know it, but that speech was going to be the high point of David Cameron's life. From thereon, I suggested, it was all going to be downhill for him.
He did, I am sure feel on the crest of a wave on that day. He'd won an election. He's seen off Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband. Now he was facing Jeremy Corbyn and was cock-a-hoop. What could go wrong he must have wondered? Well, quite a lot actually, as is already apparent.
George Osborne is making a hash of tax credits. He has to continue doing so because he's made it illegal for himself to do otherwise because of the ill thought out Fiscal Charter.
The backlash from across the political spectrum of deliberately harming the well-being of 3 million of the least well off is going to be enormous, especially when the blow is timed to land at Christmas.
Threatening the Lords if they refuse to go along with Cameron's ill judged policies makes him look stupid and them unduly wise.
Offering corporation and inheritance tax cuts to those already well off has now revealed by just how much this government thinks that we are not all in this together.
Cameron's hatred of overt borrowing has made him go cap in hand to the Chinese for some exceedingly expensive off-balance sheet deals instead.
The Europe issue is beginning to tear his party apart and internationally it's being made clear to him that he'll look a fool if he loses, as looks possible.
English Votes for English Laws is tearing the Union apart.
Despite Labour's move to the left the only people who have quit are some Lords no-one has really heard of, one of whom has not voted for years.
And there is every chance there will be a major economic crisis in the reasonably foreseeable future.
I know the media are focussing their attention on Labour at present but that may be mistaken. Labour's issues will look like nothing if most of the above come home to plague Cameron, as seems possible.
I think we face the possibility of serious realignment in UK politics over the next few years. Many think this will be on the left, and I do not rule that out: Labour is clearly uncomfortable with itself at present. But the stresses on the right look to be much more serious, not least because they hold power right now.
There's a chance that the 2020 election will see a predominantly Labour versus Conservative fight in England and Wales at least. But I am not sure right now. If Cameron and Osborne have called things as badly as looks to be possible on a host of issues the possibility of more radical restructuring looks to be very real indeed. But don't bet on a LibDem revival: Trudeau might have come through the middle in Canada, but I can't see it happening here right now.
Interesting times are ahead, and the need for sound economic policy should be very high on all politician's agenda. What you can be fairly sure of is that austerity does not meet that criteria. Viable alternatives are needed, and People's Quantitative Easing is one of them, as are measures to tackle the tax gap properly. There are more to come. Some are in The Joy of Tax. Others are in development.
If the current economic mess we're in wasn't so serious I'd almost be enjoying the prospect of what is to come. As it is, the fact that people are clearly going to suffer for it makes me very angry. But that's what motivates change, and always has.
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:
Buy me a coffee!
“English Votes for English Laws is tearing the Union apart.”
I think that is certainly what Scottish independence supporters are trying to make from it, but in reality it seems that EVEL is a smoke screen that will hardly ever be used.
That is not the point: the political consequence is
I think that David Cameron will be one of the best recruiters for SNP over the next few years. I live in Scotland myself. Labour have a real challenge to persuade the UK public that a Keynesian approach is better than the misguided approach of this Government. Being right is often not enough. You have to get your message across. In this political climate, that will not be easy.
Good few days at Stumbling and…
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2015/10/osborne-the-katie-hopkins-chancellor.html
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2015/10/marxs-relevance-today.html
The rush is clearly on for the imposition of methods to enable a permanent conservative government, or no elections, or only those fit to vote: Voting.
It may be a display of schadenfreude on my part, but I cannot help earnestly hoping that the day Cameron gave his Conference speech was indeed “his best day ever”.
“Downhill all the way” sounds fine to me, in his case.
Cameron might disagree, and consider his real best day will come after he’s out of politics when the directorships and consultancies start rolling in. Perhaps he imagines teaming with his idol Blair (assuming Blair’s still out of jail, of course) and their being peace envoys together.
Mind, if the dollar’s tanked by then, despite the best efforts to preserve it of both men, and the international community whose laws the government now openly considers it ok to disregard https://kittysjones.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/government-turns-its-back-on-international-laws-scrutiny-and-standards-its-time-to-be-very-worried/ decide to come after him, then he might indeed look back wistfully on recent days. Let’s hope, eh? 🙂
Why is nobody mentioning the simple solutions of just making the large corporations a) pay their taxes & b) pay their staff decent salaries? Just those 2 measures alone would solve a very significant amount of our financial issues.
It’s important to keep in mid that the only reason tax credits exist is because many companies are no longer paying their ground level staff living wages, so they’re hitting the system with a double whammy of screw the rules.
I might not be an economist, but that doesn’t mean I’m not capable of seeing that we’re on the road to ruin if the current government carries on with their incomprehensible policy making.
Indeed, why not a genuine living wage?
There’s an interesting debate happening on Fb atm about a system that could easily be made viable
Here’s the link for anybody who’s motivated to finding a genuine solution that’s just to all
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1639498416323301/1652697385003404/?ref=notif¬if_t=group_comment
What worries me, Richard, is the degree to which the general public are myth-bound and crippled by years of TINA. I was actually shocked to reed in a recent Polly Toynbee article (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/20/poll-tax-moment-tories-tax-credit-cuts-osborne) that27% of those WHOLLY reliant on benefits voted Tory. This indicates that path to change could be very, very slow if large numbers of people can vote in a quasi self-harming manner. I think the psychopatholgy of neo-liberalism has sunk deep into the mindset of the populace. Unless Labour focuses on a massive and coherent education programm quickly I feel pessemistic about the rate of change-because of this, even the Tax Credit cut might not stir as much protest as we think and I suspect Osborne knows he has a malleable, self-deprecating, dumbed down populace virtually devoid of self-respect in a culture where you are a loser or winner with the losers blaming themselves – I’m really beginning to feel it is as bad as that. I will personally continue to fight it but we are in for a longer haul than we might imagine.
(Simon Q)
That’s the reality of life Simon
Yes, Richard, I’m still learning about that! The sheer shock of a Government aiming to harm the most vulnerable and go back to 19th Century theories of unemployment is hard to take – it’s definately a case of ‘lighting candles in the dark’ as Quakers have put it. Yours doesn’t dim so thanks for that.
Simon Q
Simon
Can I offer an alternative view on why people vote Tory in the face of these cuts that may make you feel a bit better about your fellow voter?
Firstly, is it not the case that these cuts were not mentioned outright in the Tory manifesto?
The capacity for this Government to be disingenuous is well known – for example they were going to electrify some of the main railway lines but having got their votes in, have reneged on that. Put simply, it’s politicians telling lies and rather than voters falling for it. The Tories have just not been honest with voters.
Secondly, the Tories – actually – the British political class as a whole – are experts at divide and conquer. If we think back to the election, there was a lot being done to take our minds off more central issues by telling us that the Scots were going have to much power in Parliament via a deal with Labour. These stirrings up of old rivalries have been effective. UKIP have lanced a boil about immigration that has eaten into the votes of other parties.
Thirdly – look at the press and how it is dominated by neo-lib political economy – even the Left has bought into austerity as we see in the Guardian and Labour’s PLP (Blue Labour).
The Labour party up to Miliband must also take its share of the blame because it has deliberately tried to woo Tory voters with Tory-like policies and has ignored the significant rump who do not vote at all. People I talk to see no difference between New Labour and the Tory Party except that Cameron looked like a more competent leader when compared to Ed Miliband.
I hope that Corbyn changes this – but his party will stop him dead I think.
So don’t scorn the voter Simon – many of them have already been scorned by the mainstream parties – scorn those who tell lies and manipulate their emotions – the politicians themselves.
Keep doing your bit by engaging with people about these issues.
PSR-thanks for your comments. I agree with most of your points. BUT-the voters have seen :
The systematic vilification of the ill/vulnerable
The bedroom Tax
The lies by the DWP and statistical distortions about the effect of sanctions
A sanctions regime which has demonstrably led to deaths at the margins
I agree that the media has treated the public like mushrooms but I still can’t fully digest how a populace has, in significant numbers tolerated this without resorting to psychopathology as an explanation.
I certainly will keep on doing my bit!
Simon Q
I dare say Cameron mentioning your book was the high point of your life.
That takes some leap of imagination but if you wish to think that is the case please feel free to do so
If he’d mentioned a book of mine I’d have applied for deed poll. And don’t call me Darcy.
What you can be fairly sure of is that austerity does not meet that criteria
No it doesn’t, but if we read the right wing blogs there’s a denial that we have austerity. We get that from Conservative politicians too. They’ll argue that spending has increased in both nominal and real terms in recent years. So their argument is “Cuts? What Cuts”.
Of course the position is slightly more complex than they make it appear. When we see school class sizes increase for a lack of teachers and hospitals struggle to cope under the strain, we can see that we have cuts. Of course if they were true to their political position they’d go easy on the tax rises too. They are supposed to be the party of low tax but whenever VAT is increased its always the Tories who increase it!
So we need to tackle this argument head-on. Maybe the topic for a future post, Richard?
Maybe a book….
I have been asked to write one on austerity
And it is part of my work at City too….
Your most recent book was next on my list for a good read. At the moment I am finishing off Piketty but I’ve also started to read Mark Blyth’s book on austerity ‘The History of a Dangerous Idea’ which has snuck in – sorry – I just couldn’t resist.
I think that even you would be hard pressed to top Blyth’s analysis of austerity in which he delves into the consequences of its use over a number of time frames. Too me he strips it bare and makes it clear who actually benefits from it and it is certainly NOT the likes of me and thee.
If you want to write a book about the subject and avoid being accused of writing ‘yet another one’ then I feel (and I’m speaking as a reader and a learner about these issues) it needs to concentrate on bringing together some of your ideas on this blog as alternatives to austerity.
So (if I may) I would like to suggest a shorter exposition of what austerity does and then an in-depth exploration of how your ideas could deal with the negative consequences of austerity. Blyth is really describing an orthodoxy – I’m not sure that he is heterodox enough to put forward ground breaking alternatives – a bit like Piketty really.
I know that not everyone will have read Blyth and you will be hoping to capture the ‘new to the subject reader’ but nevertheless the TINA narrative needs exactly what you offer and that is that there ARE alternatives to this most destructive of policies that basically ensures that the rich investor gets their money back first and bugger everyone else when the system collapses in on itself.
The focus would be alternatives
I agree: Blyth has done austerity
I think that is because Greece has become the benchmark for REAL austerity, horrifically enough with 3 million with no health care. I’ve hear many Tory commentators refer to what we have here as non-austerity because there IS still welfare spending! Greece is then cited as if the hardest hit should see the Government as being generous that we aren’t further down that road!
Sadly, as long as politicians (of either side) are able to rig the voting system in their favour, this country will continue to stumble from centre right to centre left and back again without any meaningful reform of the underlying political and economic system.
First past the post voting to enforce a two party system and not disrupt the fundamental basis of an elite business and financial establishment which can back either horse and never lose, is one of the controlling factors in this thorny problem.
Without a serious attempt at electoral reform, the gaming of our democracy will continue unabated. When you have a systemic problem, you need a systemic solution. This will probably be one based on proportional representation and an acceptance that broad coalition governments which actually represent the wider views of the voting public are actually more democratic and better for the long term interests of the whole country. Reforming campaign finance is another essential requirement to removing the controlling influence of the rich over the poor.
Add in a societal move to economic democracy with wider forms of worker owned corporations and some serious questions over the long term ownership of the vast pools of financial capital accrued over centuries from the surplus generated from underpaid (not to mention slave) labour – and you have the beginnings of a sustainable society and economy worth fighting for, in my humble opinion!
Blair’s REAL crime (or rather, his crime of omission, as opposed to his two crimes of commission – the greater, the foolish, lethal and destructive illegal invasion of Iraq; his lesser one, the railroading in of the ill-conceived “academy” model into a Schools Framework Bill at the last moment, so that it couldn’t really be opposed), as I say, his REAL crime of omission was to listen to his backwoodsmen (Prezza being the chief one here, for once with the support of his arch-enemy, Mandy), and to bottle out the implementation of the Jenkins Report on Electoral Reform.
Jenkins’ AV+ was a carefully crafted solution to the problem, that preserved the constituency link (500 constituencies, with election using AV, so EVERY successful candidate would need at least 50% of the votes cast), to which were to be added 125 Additional Members, chosen from Party Lists, on the basis of the proportion of votes garnered by that Party in the Election, hence AV+.
Tweaks I would have added, would have been to open the Party Lists to a ballot, so that the most popularly supported on each list would have been selected as Additional Members, and I would have had 250 two-member constituencies, with two ballots in each, one an All-Men’s List, one on an All-Women’s List, thus ensuring 50% representation of elected Members. A similar situation could have applied to the Party lists, so that even the Additional Members would be 63 of one and 62 of the other, as far as possible.
But Blair bottled it, and so (as I’ve said before – apologies for repetition), I resigned from the Labour Party in 2001 on grounds of conscience (since this was NOT a decision a PM, or even a Party should make, but only the British people in a referendum), and only came back in 2007, when Blair had gone, and Gordon Brown seemed, amongst other things, more amenable to the idea of PR.
Alas, Gordon too bottled it, even though the adoption of PR in 2008 would have been a key differentiator from the Tories, and might have allowed Gordon to win even in 2010, but certainly (I fairly sure on this) in 2008, or even 2009, in the wake of his successful navigation and negotiation of the “Great Crash” of 2007/8.
“If only” really IS the saddest phrase in the language – in ANY language.
Simon
So, you still can’t understand? And you infer that you want to learn?
How about ‘fear’ driving the fact that the British electorate seem to keep voting for people who hurt them?
Try this concept (I quote from Wikipedia to hurry things a long) as I heard the writer of the book below on Radio 4 this morning:
“In sociology and economics, the ‘precariat’ is a social class formed by people suffering from precarity, which is a condition of existence without predictability or security, affecting material or psychological welfare as well as being a member of a proletariat class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labour to live. Specifically, it is applied to the condition of lack of job security, in other words intermittent employment or underemployment and the resultant precarious existence.The emergence of this class has been ascribed to the entrenchment of neoliberal capitalism.”
“The British economist Guy Standing has analysed the precariat as a new emerging social class in work done for the think tank Policy Network and a subsequent book Precariat: The New Dangerous Class and proposes a basic income as a solution for addressing the problem.”
Guy Standing has it nailed. I’ve met people like this face to face. My advice Simon is to keep reading. To blame people (voters) is wrong – even I have done it in my moments of despair. But I have come to agree with John Seddon in that it is not really the people but the fault of the system(s) they exist in that drives their lemming-like behaviour.
In fact to blame the people is actually typically neo-liberal in my view and should be avoided.
Keep reading…………………..
Interview of Guy Standing by Max Keiser here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBJlU4xIxBk&feature=youtu.be
Thanks PSR-I do try to learn it’s the rate that is often the problem! I agree with you and Standing about the ‘precariat’ perhaps we need to consider Erich Fromm’s ‘Fear of Freedom’ as well.
I also agree that blaming others for not becoming conscious of the system that ‘runs them’ just strengthens those forces and alienates. I am still trying to come to terms with how the public has accepted the vilification of the vulnerable/poor and have been at the receiving end of it when I experienced benefits being stopped twice during the period when the Government were incentivising the DWP to stop any benefit for the least reason.
However, I would stop short at seeing people as merely passive, helpless receivers of cultural memes otherwise one is devoid of any critical voice. After all the ‘system’ is as much people as those that are victimised by it. Blame needs to be transformed into engagement and education.
Simon Q
Why people vote against their own interests always reminds me of Thomas Frank’s book, ‘What’s the matter with Kansas? – How Conservatives won the heart of America’.
Part of the problem is that the Tories can get conservative print media and poverty porn television to do their dirty work for them. The message is already embedded – immigrants, benefit cheats etc. Somebody is cheating ! We’re being overrun ! It’s no longer a cold hard analysis about what will benefit *me* but an instinctive cultural reflex against the ‘other’ or the ‘outsider’.
Simon is correct. What we need is a reeducation program. Perhaps this can best be done via a TV series, but the broadcasters are too timid to permit those with the necessary skills and expertise such as yourself Richard to reach the public in this way.
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=Greece&country2=United+Kingdom
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3049622/UK-budget-shame-Britain-highest-deficit-Europe-Government-borrowing-Greece.html
4-bed villa….Greece….€45,000
1-bed flat in Altea (Spain) (20-metres to the sea) €300/Mnth.
Perspective is a fine thing……Anyway…Altea looks good to me, for the winter (after all, I cannot rely on the NHS anymore and the Spanish system works much better…no arguing for bedpans/nurses etc)