A number of people have asked me to clarify where I stand with Labour, and whether I will work for them. It's only fair in that case to make clear what my plans are.
I'm carrying on as I have done for a number of years. I will be continuing to run Tax Research UK as well as undertaking my new duties as Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City University and supporting the Fair Tax Mark.
I'm delighted that over the summer three of the five projects that are the basis of my research funding from the Friends' Provident Foundation have received the prominence that Jeremy Corbyn has given them: anyone who wants to advance their ideas would feel the same. I will continue, as I have over the summer, to rigorously defend the value of those ideas.
But as a person who has spent more than a decade now generating and then developing ideas that is what I plan to continue to do, and will be willing to talk to and advise anyone who wants to put them to reasonable use, as at least six UK political parties have, in various ways, done over the last few years.
As I have said, often, I did not write Jeremy Corbyn's economic policies and am by no means responsible for them all. And I am certainly not, whatever the press says, his economics guru. I am just a man who writes a blog, does research, produces ideas, and meets people who want to talk about them. In that case of course I'll talk to Labour about my ideas if they want me to do so: that's what advocacy of an idea permits.
But that's not an exclusive relationship. It never has been: for example, I last worked for the Greens in the EU Parliament in July.
So, it's business as usual.
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:
Probably a good time to clarify as McDonnell has just signed up to Osborne’s fiscal budget charter.
Back to square one.
Well that’s it. Game over.
Now what?
Guardian also reported that ‘McDonnell says Labour will take an approach radically different from the Tories’ austerity measures’ (even though Guardian headline reads: ‘We’ll match Osborne and live within our means’). Perhaps McDonnell will clarify in due course.
Not just shooting himself in one foot, but reloading and making sure he gets both. You can’t help but despair sometimes.
How disheartening – McDonnell doesn’t seem to have understood the slightest notion of what you have been advocating.
It’s a bit like a punter’s marriage, just the time between the romantic marriage stage and the practical friendship stage has been awfully short.
Even if you’re not inending to work for them Richard, could you please use whatever contacts you have to find out what exactly is going on with McDonnell’s recent decision (ahead of the conference) to support Osbourne’s surplus pledge.
I’m hoping it’s a ploy to neutralise it as a political issue in the short-term (to give breathing space for more sensible policies to be developed, explained and accepted), but I’m rather worried that he may actually believe it to be a good idea in itself.
I wonder. This is a quote from McDonnell’s website
“Deficit denial is a non-starter for anyone to have any economic credibility with the electorate. This was a key finding of the poll recently published by Jon Cruddas, examining why Labour lost the election.”
So it might be just about trying to get elected!
Which makes Corbyn/McDonnell no better than Kendall, Cooper or Burnham.
It’ll be policy by focus group next.
Let’s hide the truth until it’s more politically expedient to tell it seems to the be the policy of choice.
Does that sound familiar ?
“Business as Usual”, though referring to a separate topic, turns out to be a disappointingly prescient title for this thread.
I voted Green at the last election and despite Corbyn I will continue to do so.
Why?
Because reading the article on the new Labour leader in the Guardian yesterday I was struck by how the Blairite part of the party (most of the PLP?) seem to think that they can win elections just by taking Tory voters from Cameron & Co.
What this means policy wise is of course a sort of Tory-lite approach to policy to attract such voters which might explain why Labour seem to be erring towards the language and practice of austerity yet again. Hopefully this might just be a short term tactic by Corbyn to steady the ship. But in politics, compromise is now only reserved to preserve party unity; out here in the real world the rest of us are made to live with TINA and orthodoxies which we know are wrong.
What I was hoping to see was Corbyn’s approach beginning to be aimed at attracting that huge rump of the electorate who have given up on politics and who don’t vote anymore. I was hoping he might energise these – certainly the people I talk to did not vote at all for because the Milliband offer did nothing for them.
The blue labour contingent in the Labour party will stop me voting for them – period. This is because they tacitly accept the dominance of market thinking. But more importantly they cravenly court Tory voters whilst purposefully ignoring people for whom politics is not working – and that is wrong.
I’m glad to hear therefore that Richard is not getting too involved with Labour.
i reckon many of those disenfranchised voters will still be drawn to Corbyn/McDonnell as long as reducing inequality and poverty remain central aims. as for agreeing to get the deficit down; this will hopefully nullify Tory scaremongering regarding Labour’s past profligacy which, true or not, has made the ‘business-like’ Tory image so enticing to those worried about financial security in uncertain times.
Don’t the Green party advocate Positive Money? I think I’d rather fight inside the Labour party.
The Greens were anti-austerity in the last election – that is why I voted for them. They were AA before Labour had the courage to change and begin to challenge the big lies that a frankly stupid post-it note from a former Labour minister gave birth to in 2010.
As for Positive Money – I agree that ‘it’s good but it’s not that good’ and I hope that Richard continues to be tapped up for better ideas even by the Greens.
Natalie, Caroline, Rupert Reid and others all know my number
very pleased to hear your continuing on your current path. i’m sure your work will continue to be fruitful and by remaining independent your ideas will hopefully continue to be drawn upon by all political parties.
That’s my hope
Already submitted and awaiting moderation
I do have a life beyond this blog