If the hype is to be believed we are are at tipping point.
There is no doubt that Covid cases are coming down, even if the evidence that this is the result of the UK vaccine programme remains in doubt, based on evidence given to the House of Commons yesterday.
There is, however, and despite the massive uncertainties and risks, an emerging plan to reopen the country, even if many well qualified commentators doubt the wisdom of doing so at the pace suggested.
And today there is a leak suggesting that Sunak has realised that the March budget will be a time for more economic support, and not to begin a programme of tax rises and austerity.
In the midst of this Labour has sensed the mood for change with Starmer making a speech today on a new economic vision. Let's see.
I say that for a reason. So far everything to do with the government's planning, at least, is intensely reactive. Some of that is appropriate, of course. I am the first to say that there is genuine uncertainty on what is really happening with Covid 19. I accept the constraint.
And at the same time I do not. Surely there has to be a vision after what has happened for what recovery might look like? It cannot be cronyism, can it? The stench of that arising from Westminster is what has defined this government to date. Beyond the desire to profit friends and to make expedient rather than appropriate decisions little has happened to suggest that this government has got much right as yet. And nothing, barring the smallest of token gestures, and failed schemes such as that on greening housing, provide any real indication of a plan as yet.
In this crisis, where the promise of seeing friends fells like liberation, that may be enough to secure short term support, but there ate still nearly four years to go before another election is called. Presuming that Covid does not dominate this entire period (and it might) what then?
Labour needs to take risks today to differentiate itself from the government. There is every reason to do so. If we are really at a turning point (and if it is not now, it will come) then horizons will lift. At present the government seems without any sort of vision. Having ‘done' Brexit it seems devoid of purpose and disinclined to deal with the mess that it has created.
I have no expectation that anything Labour says will have any impact on its fortunes in Scotland. Elsewhere an idea as to why Labour is now worth considering as an alternative on any basis other than ‘not the Tories' is overdue and so would be welcome.
But will Starmer deliver? The signs to date have not been good. It will be worth reviewing, although given my schedule today that might not happen until tomorrow, to give fair warning.
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:
What vision? This morning on the Today programme I listened to Annalise Dodds waffle for a good 5 minutes when she was asked to sum up in a snappy soundbite what was Labours vision for the future. Sadly she has no idea and even more sadly doesn’t realise this.
With this hapless load of charlatans in power who have had the worst record of any post war government Labour should have a clear vision for the future and be at least 25 points ahead in the polls.
…..’ere I saw that Sir Kevin Stalin in Spec-savers, I guess ‘e woz getting some vision, im and is missus ….Dodds.
Maybe Sir S is concerned at giving too many good ideas to the toryscum, who for the most part are bereft of ideas (or more likely – functionally incapable).
Of course I exclude mateism from this comment (giving money to mates).
I’m working with a Labour council, not saying on what, (doubtless some readers can guess) & not saying where , but it will make a difference to citizens, potentially a big one. Oddly, it does not need support from Sir Stalin or the B.Liarites that surround him. Even in the desert that is the UK, there remains some possibility of change.
I have been patient with Starmer. We live in a (small c) conservative country and if you want to propose anything radical it has to come from someone seen as competent and trustworthy. But what is the point of being trustworthy and competent if you are not willing to alter course and take the country somewhere better?
It is a “long game” with the next election some way off but NOW is the time for some vision of what the future could look like. I want to hear something along the lines…….
“If we can afford to pay people to do nothing (furlough) in the COVID crisis then we can afford to pay them to do the essential work required to mitigate climate change, to care for our sick and old. and to raise up our next generation…… and if you don’t think that the climate, social/health care and education are in crisis then you need to get out more!”.
That would help
I expect the vision will be Blue Labour in flavour, which means Starmer will try to balance being the ‘right sort of people’ with nationalism and austerity economics. But people who supported his leadership, like Tom Kilbasi, are calling him out on this. He writes in the Guardian
“Starmer has instead let focus groups define his strategy, which is to go easy on the government, rather than developing a clear message of his own. This is profoundly naive: the public will always say they dislike politicians “playing politics”. Letting randomly selected members of the public set the political tone is followership, not leadership. .”
Maybe, Starmer has listened and changes his tune. But I doubt it.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/16/keir-starmer-leadership-urgent-course-correction-labour
If the patronising tones of Nick Robinson, answered by the meek tones of Anneliese Dodds are anything to go by, then Starmer will have to give a speech to rival FDR today.
Until the Labour leadership decide to adopt and press their own framing, they will be stuck on an ever losing wicket.
They need to start from the position (even if, – initially – in their own heads) that the Tories created the appalling economic framework the pandemic unfolded within, due mainly to George Osborne’s thoroughly ideological austerity, with it’s deep cuts to the NHS and local government, hampering early, effective responses, and leading to the scandal of ineffective outsourced test-and-trace and other examples of cronyism.
At the next level, they need to push, push, and push on the need for new thinking that puts good, and that means well paid jobs and quality services for the whole country on the table. Biden is a possible model here. His mantra “Well-paid union jobs” is just the ticket!
The whole emphasis need to be to get off the back foot and when, for example, in the TV interview, the Tory or their friendly interviewer asks the predictable question of who is going to pay for it, demand to know from them how their repeated failed solutions or inaction will deliver improvement. That must the be followed by the answer that we are well rehearsed in, about the real nature of money and the government’s own abilities in that field.
The first step to any recovery from the current disaster that confronts us is to admit that only the right changes will put us on the path to a better future. For Labour, that demands courage and solid conviction to challenge failed conventional thinking.
At present, I probably expect too much.
To me it all depends on whether or not it wants to concentrate on the loss of the ‘Red Wall’ voters (and appease perhaps people who have been whipped into a right-wing frenzy by a mixture of misinformation and austerity) or have a broader appeal to those whom they have been letting down for a long time. Labour has been ceding territory to the extreme capitalist Right since the early 1970s.
One of the mistakes it made then was to assume that its social security systems would prop up working people whilst the ‘white heat of technology’ would eventually re-employ people in new industries. In this they got outflanked by the ‘road to serfdom’ Neo-liberals who ignored money sovereignty facts and said the State could not afford to do that. This has hampered the way the Left could reconstitute State support for assistance and ideas like UBI.
In 2003, public sector pensions were changed under Labour from final salary to average salary pensions on the basis that the State could not afford them. But Labour still gave huge tax breaks to the private pension sector later on. Why would you plead poverty on one form of provision only to cut your income even when you believed that that income funded what you were funding? Since when did Labour take money from working people?
Labour not only over estimated technology (it actually seems to result in requiring less labour than previous modes of working) but also under estimated that people want to work, and be ‘working people’ – stand on their own two feet and provide for their families and direct their own lives. People want security in that – predictability, certainty. No political party has been able to deliver that in the UK, but the Tories always banged on about work (as they sneakily continued to undermine it at the very same time).
And the other issue is of course a craven attitude to financial engineering – asset stripping acquisitions, sending jobs abroad etc., ensuring that only investors have security and predictability, not ordinary people, Government being left to mop up the mess this creates afterwards. Labour’s ‘challenge’ on this has been almost non-existent. The only honourable mention is Tony Benn who I think saw right through all this and remained an ardent critic of it only to be pushed out to the fringes of the Labour Left.
As we’ve said before, Labour is cowed and timid. I don’t expect it to change at all. It has given up and hopes to win little skirmishes on the side lines.
And if you were on at least £80K a year plus expenses, and all you had to do was be popular with people in order to do so – well forget party politics and keep on winning eh? It’s a nice little career to just pretend to care. It beats reading Stephanie Kelton’s book or reading up on the 1866 Act eh? Or listening to Richard Murphy – oh – it’s all so difficult isn’t it really changing things? Best to go with the flow – after all – it’s the voter’s fault – not ours.
What you get instead is someone like Paul Embery extolling the the virtues of Labour ‘engaging’ with angry and wound up people who have been taught to hate and legitimizing them in order to get into power. And being lauded for it as if he is some sort of political sage. God help us.
I see no latent epiphany in Labour about any of the these problems. Sorry.
Well said! My sentiments entirely. There’s just no fight in the party. Some highly paid front benchers have been sitting on their hands for months. I’d struggle to name them. What we have in reality is a failed system. Neither party is fit to govern (Polly Toynbee wrote a good piece on this recently). Neither party will want to rock the creaking boat. The Tories for obvious reasons and Labour because, as you say, it might be a rather bothersome task and some hard work. One further point. Labour may think it has four years to swing about in its hammock pondering its attack line. It may not. A surprise election will find it unprepared and in a very predictable panic.
No party can hope to win elections by simply being against things. Its not enough for Labour to want to reverse the cuts of austerity, when even the Tories now gloomily accept that austerity post 2010 was a mistake.
Labour’s lack of vision goes back before Starmer, as the key weakness of Corbyn was that he wanted to turn the clock back to the 1970s (pre-thatcherism) but with no sense of how different the World is becomming 40 years on.
If Labour wants unique policies there is no shortage of options, from devolution and affordable housing, to Internet access and on line learning for deprived children, wellbeing and mental health as key goals of government, a green new deal that ends extractive fossil fuel energy, and of course a road map towards basic income that could re-vitalise our local economies (in ways that the “levelling-up” ambitions of Tories will never do).
Whatever they choose to prioritise, Labour needs a modern agenda that looks forward. But this will be very hard for a party that is still obsessed with looking back to its glory days.
For me, Labour needs a good dose of Larry Sanders – I heard him on Any Questions where he neatly summed up the failure of Test and Trace etc. more on the Greens website: https://greenworld.org.uk/article/our-enemy-not-only-virus
The Greens are making inroads in local politics and increasingly making sense to gen public.
There is a move among grass roots Labour types to push for PR to replace FPTP – some will see it (in a Corbynesque way) as a reduction in Labour credibility. I think many feel it could save Labour.
Meanwhile Starmer needs to say something with some bite and passion. Dodds will do well to create some narratives that work for her style – if she isn’t short and snappy, she does need to distill her thinking into succinct messages.
I like Larry
I gather from him that the feeling is mutual
I read that Keir Starmer said……
“If I were prime minister, I would introduce a new British recovery bond. This could raise billions to invest in local communities, jobs and businesses. It could help build the infrastructure of the future – investing in science, skills, technology and British manufacturing. It would also provide security for savers and give millions of people a proper stake in Britain’s future”….
Did you write his speech? At least it’s a start.
I didn’t
And it’s not as good as I hoped still, by some way
But it is an opening
My tuppence.
The Great Knight Hope (TM) being hoisted upon his nag and led out to conquer the naughty schoolboy spaffer and save the world!
The launch sequence is initiated.
‘Outlining what he called “our moral crusade”
What was needed, he said, was “a new partnership between an active government, enterprising business and the British people”.
‘…likening current times to the postwar period, with a “determination that our collective sacrifice must lead to a better future”.’
–––––––––
‘Crusade’! — Really? That is not tin-eared it is a calculated taking of the piss (readying for further adventurism in the ME using ancient anti-Muslim lexicon).
‘New partnership’, ‘Collective sacrifice’ — Why not just revert to that post-war covenant instead of trying to fob the boomers grand kids off with a tawdry imitation of it?
It seems that Bozo’s spaff gobbling sock puppet GKH is being fanfared towards the only action that will save their Union and keep their Ancient City independent — a GNU led by a GKH ™.
Does Labour have a vision? If it does I think it is still being too timid in actually showing what it is. The Tories do have a vision. It is to get back to their “good old days” as soon as possible. For the Tories if that means using all the power of the state to get there including spending, they will, but there is no conviction behind it. No grand plan. For them the state is a blunt instrument, to be used when necessary to defend their status quo.
The elephant in the room on Starmer’s speech yesterday was that he didn’t mention Brexit or the consequences of the Tory deal once. He did mention covid of course, but no sign of Brexit or what he thinks our future relationship with our closest neighbours should be. That new relationship with Europe should be a key part of challenging the Tory status quo, but so far silence. Labour are not alone in this as the LibDems have also become timid on being seen as too pro Europe.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/13/keir-starmer-facing-pressure-to-end-silence-on-tory-brexit-failures
So far, it is the Tories that are being allowed to dictate the agenda. I assume that the timid response by the opposition is due to them not wanting to be seen rocking the boat or being unpatriotic. If anything rocking the boat is what they need to do. Starmer can say there is no going back, but he needs to offer something that is radically different. A new deal approach on the green economy, the NHS and our future relationship with Europe for starters. If Labour cannot do that now, arguably they never will.