It is hard to say Labour split yesterday. Seven MPs did instead throw a very minor strop and the supposed Independent Group resulted.
It's easy to tell why they are both wrong in principle, and so bound to fail. These are two of the eleven statements of principles that they issued:
- Britain works best as a diverse, mixed social market economy, in which well-regulated private enterprise can reward aspiration and drive economic progress and where government has the responsibility to ensure the sound stewardship of taxpayer's money and a stable, fair and balanced economy.
- A strong economy means we can invest in our public services. We believe the collective provision of public services and the NHS can be delivered through government action, improving health and educational life chances, protecting the public, safeguarding the vulnerable, ensuring dignity at every stage of life and placing individuals at the heart of decision-making.
In the first they suggest that there is ‘taxpayer's money'. I question where they place the apostrophe. And they are, anyway, wrong. They do not understand that a government with its own currency and central bank creates money for the country, and not the other way round. That's a fundamental flaw.
The second paragraph suggests that the government is wholly dependent on the private sector for its ability to spend. They might as well have sent a note to the bond markets saying ‘please be generous to us'. It appears that Chris Leslie, almost certainly the most incompetent man to have ever been given the title Shadow Chancellor, has still learned nothing at all about money and macroeconomics.
This lot deserve to fail.
The UK needs a new politics. It is not getting it.
And it won't until we get PR.
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:
I agree.
And so does this chap whose opinion I value as much as yours:
http://blog.spicker.uk/the-independent-group-wants-us-to-click-on-i-agree-unfortunately-i-dont/
I’ve never seen such a potentially dysfunctional group of people in all my life paraded before us. Here before us is one of the real reasons that UKIP has taken Labour votes.
Next step – bye bye (sic) elections please so hopefully we can flush them out of the Labour party and Parliament itself. I have to say that I cannot yet see anyone from the Tory party joining them. But I could be wrong.
A stunt that keeps the BBC happy with a formulated political ‘crisis’, yawn as they say.
Here is John Robertson’s tongue-in-cheek look at the potential economic competence of some of the seven 😉
https://thoughtcontrolscotland.com/2019/02/18/chuck-your-money-at-us-say-labour-breakaway-mps-and-scottish-labour-should-pay-attention/
Sorry, I don’t see anything in the second paragraph that mentions private sector. Can you explain?
It says we are dependent upon it
No we are not
Christopher, I thought that too.
I think the crux of it is the first sentence
“A strong economy means we can invest in our public services”. I think Richard is saying we can invest in our public services whether we have a strong economy or not, ie. regardless of the private sector. I could be wrong!
You are right
We do not pay for services from tax
A strong economy comes from pouting people to work
If the private sector does not do that government does not give up as well
But that is what was implied
No-one should enter public life without a thorough understanding of the correct use of apostrophes. I am taking care not to use one here!
James from Durham says:
“No-one should enter public life without a thorough understanding of the correct use of apostrophes. I am taking care not to use one here!”
Well if Brexit predictions of dire chaos in the vegetable markets come to their destructive fruition, the ‘greengrocer’s apostrophe’ will be largely redundant. 🙂
Even after BREXIT, we will still be able to produce apostrophes, even if nothing else. We can export them too.
Angela Smith wrote an appallingly ignorant article against renationalising water companies claiming it would lead to much lower standards, critiqued here: https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2018/10/angela-smith-is-spouting-pro.html
On the evidence of its first day, it also deserves to fail on transparency grounds.
It is asking for donations which will be sent to a private company, which means that it is not subject to electoral law rules requiring them to declare financial backers.
You’re joking?!!
My God – who do they think they are? W
I checked back – they are registered as a private company, not a political party yet.
I understand that they have undertaken to make a voluntary disclosure, for donations of more than £7,500.
Given the exposure and publicity received on their first day, they are subject to a lighter touch regulation than their ‘competitors’ eg; the Liberal Democrats
[…] And finally, from Richard Murphy: […]
I noted that one of the reasons given by Chuka Umunna in an interview with Channel 4 for disagreeing with Labour policy was that, “I don’t like making unrealistic promises”. Given that I didn’t think the last manifesto was radical enough, this is hugely disappointing.
Also, anything which potentially gets rid of Mike Gapes (who is a massive pain in the arse and likes nothing better than to whinge to the Mail on Sunday) from public life, can’t be all bad.