One Nation Labour looks more like West Germany than East

If Cameron wants an accurate comparison for Labour's policies, he should look to modern Germany.

David Cameron told the Sun yesterday that Ed Miliband’s "one nation" philosophy "sounded more like East Germany than Great Britain". The irony here is that what few policies Labour has revealed look startlingly like the political economy of the Federal Republic of Germany more than anything else. 

Workers on company boards

Labour has pledged to put an employee on the remuneration committee of large companies. What has gone unnoticed about this policy is that remuneration committees are a subcommittee of companies’ board of directors: putting an elected employee on the committee would mean having at least one on the company’s board. Miliband hinted as much in his first conference Q&A.

In Germany, large firms’ supervisory boards are 50% elected by workers, and 50% by shareholders – a process called co-determination, or Mitbestimmungsgesetz. The supervisory board in turn elects the firm’s management board and approves all major decisions. This system where workers and capital owners play fairly equal parts is in contrast to the Anglosphere view of company boards as being the exclusive petty fiefdom of shareholders.

It’s not surprising that Ed Miliband has sold this co-determination policy indirectly, in terms of tackling executive pay – reform of corporate governance is hardly sexy stuff for the electorate. While one worker is hardly going to be able to outvote shareholders, Miliband’s former senior policy advisor Sonia Sodha tells me the policy is "an important first step to something more significant".

Vocational qualifications and apprenticeships

Technical and vocational schools are a fundamental part of Germany’s economy, where vocational education actually outstrips academic study and about half of 16-18 year old school leavers take apprenticeships – compared to 9% in the UK.

Two Labour policies lean in this direction: Ed Miliband’s big conference announcement that he would introduce a new "Technical Bacc" route for the "forgotten 50%" not going into higher education was welcomed by further education leaders as a strong way of promoting technical education. Ed’s pledge that all public contractors would have to offer apprenticeship schemes to be considered for tender it also designed change the situation where under a third of large UK firms offer apprenticeships – and bring it closer to the German state of affairs, where nearly all do.

State investment bank

Founded in 1948 as part of the Marshall Plan, Germany’s state investment bank, the KfW, or Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau - meaning Reconstruction Credit Institute, is a cornerstone of the country’s active industrial policy. The country’s technology minister sits on the bank’s 37-member board. 

The bank provides cheap finance for housing projects, environmental projects and small and medium sized businesses, particularly those looking to export. Widely regarded as the "safest bank in the world", in the words of the bank’s Chair Ulrich Schroeder, the KfW is active "only in areas where the market does not provide a satisfactory solution".

Shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna visited Germany in February to take a look at the country’s banking system, including the not-for profit Sparkassen and local-authority controlled Landsbanks: it’s not hard to see the connection between Mr Schroeder’s views, Labour’s state investment bank policy, and Miliband’s explicit aim to address market failure in SME finance.

Cooperative trade unions

In Miliband’s second Q&A to the Labour conference, he spoke of a role for business and trade unions as partners in enterprise rather than adversaries. Ed cited the car industry and the Olympics as an example of the sort of cooperation he’d like to see between unions and employers.

This kind of cooperation is straight out of German political economy. On top of participating in institutionalised co-determination, German unions are otherwise central to the country’s economic strategy. In the British car industry Miliband speaks of unions actually hold down wages: this is the strategy of German manufacturing exporters, who held down their unit labour cost, internally devaluing the cost of their exports to other countries and causing an export boom that left them with a €140.3bn trade surplus in 2010 – the highest in the EU. (Conversely, UK has the biggest deficit.) This is, incidentally, the internal devaluation which the PIIGS countries are now struggling to replicate through austerity in order to be able to compete in export markets.

Labour’s support for a public sector pay freeze was justified in terms of prioritising "jobs over wages". If this attitude continues then expect to see it implicitly articulated for the private sector as well.

Under Miliband's leadership, Labour has looked to Germany's social market economy for inspiration. Photograph: Getty Images.

Jon Stone is a political journalist. He tweets as @joncstone.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Lowering the voting age is the best way to protect the franchise we've fought so hard for

Empowering young people is the best way to renew civic and political engagement.

Too many believe that politics isn’t working for them. That those who make decisions are not acting in their interests. And too often, narrow interests win over the wider public interest. Our economy isn’t working either. It never will until we repair our fragile politics.

When I was leader of Oldham Council I recognised that to reform, it must open up. It needed to bring forward ideas and challenges from all those who are affected by decisions taken in their name.

We gave constitutional rights for the youth council to move motions and reports at our full council meeting. We opened up our meetings with live web-streaming and questions from all residents. And we embraced social media, combined with instant comments, which were shown in the chamber during debates.

It opened up democracy and gave councillors an insight into issues which affect young people. But two things stood out. The first was that many of these issues are the same ones which affect the wider public. But they are affected in different ways by decisions or the lack of action by government. Second, and most importantly, while we were engaging young people they had no say over who was making decisions on their behalf.

So of crucial importance to me is how we bolster democracy to weather the challenges it faces today and in the future. Recent events at home and abroad have convinced me of the importance of this. There are two separate approaches that parliament must take. Firstly, we must devolve more power from central government to local communities. And secondly, we must at all costs renew civic and political engagement here in the UK. I’ve come to believe that getting more and more young people engaged in politics is fundamental to realising this second point. And I see lowering the voting age as key to cementing this.

I hear the arguments against this loud and clear. Eighteen is the official age of independence. Eighteen is when someone forms their world view. And 18 is when reasoned, judgemental thought suddenly kicks in. On that basis, the years preceding that are presumably some kind of wilderness of rational thinking and opinion forming. Someone even tweeted at me this week to inform me that under-18s don’t know what they want for dinner, let alone how to vote.

Needless to say, I find all these points unconvincing and in some cases dismissive and patronising.

I speak with people even younger than 16 who have coherent views on politics, often a match for any adult. They even know what they want for dinner! And I am of the strong belief that empowering young people through a wider enfranchisement will speed up this development. Even better if votes at 16 is accompanied by compulsory political education in the preceding years.

So if your argument is that young people are too immature, that they lack political knowledge to be given the vote, or that they aren’t responsible enough – then I say to you, bring on lowering the voting age! As my argument is that empowering young people to vote will help overcome these challenges where they exist.

But where do other countries sit on lowering the voting age? Admittedly, among western democracies, the UK would be taking a bold step-forward. In Europe, it’s only Austria where all 16-year-olds can vote. There are some patchwork exceptions to this closer to home. For example, the voting age on the Isle of Man is 16. And this week we heard that the Welsh Assembly is considering lowering the voting age to 16 for local elections.

Outside of these scant examples, there is little precedent for change. However, we shouldn’t find ourselves cowed by this. Our past is littered with bold actions, proud speeches and even lives lost to win and defend the right to vote.

200 years ago on Tandle Hill in Royton hundreds of protestors, who had travelled from nearby mill towns like Oldham and Rochdale, gathered together. They were preparing to march on Peters Field in Manchester on a summer’s day in August 1819. What was at stake was a greater say in parliamentary decisions, at a time of famine and widespread poverty. Non-land-owning workers were entirely excluded from the franchise. By the end of the day, government cavalry had cut down 14 protesters, and injured hundreds more. In 1832 only men renting or owning valuable land were given the vote. And it wasn’t until 1918 that all men were included in the franchise.

This month we remember the 100-year anniversary of the Battle of Passchendaele. The sacrifices made during the First World War by our working-class men and boys, 250,000 of whom were under 18, was a catalyst for extending the vote to all men.

Next year we celebrate 100 years since the start of women’s suffrage. In Oldham, Annie Kenney and Emmeline Pankhurst fought tirelessly. They would both be arrested before seeing that privilege granted to only some women in 1918. Today it is sobering to think that women didn’t have the vote before 1918.

And it was only in 1970 that the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, allowing teenagers to vote for the first time in the UK. Prevalent then were exactly the same arguments that stop 16- and 17-year-olds voting today.

While we recognise the fight of others, we fail in our duty if we believe the fight for democracy is settled.

So I draw inspiration from how the franchise has steadily grown throughout our history. And I reflect on the acts of courage, grit and determination that have won us that change. With the extension of the franchise have come the liberties, freedoms and values that make our society what it is today. It hasn’t happened of its own accord. Lives have been lost and bold steps have been taken for us to enjoy placing that cross alongside the candidate of our choosing.

This cannot be seen as a way to shift the political debate to young voters either. Many older voters, including many of my friends and family, feel that politics isn’t working for them either. Reducing the voting age isn’t the silver bullet to address that disconnect, but it is vital to strengthening connect between decision makers and those who pay taxes.

I welcome the debate on lowering the voting age. A debate about once again spreading the freedoms and responsibilities of our society to many more people. And I’ll match arguments against this every step of the way. Because I am clear in my mind that defending the franchise and extending the franchise are two sides of the same coin.

Jim McMahon is the Labour MP for Oldham West and Royton.

0800 7318496