Miliband promises "big changes in our economy" in New Year message

The Labour leader emphasises his long-term plan to reform capitalism in an attempt to rebut the charge that he is too focused on short-term measures.

It is Ed Miliband's focus on living standards that has allowed him to define the political agenda for months, leaving the Tories in a strategic tailspin, so it's no surprise to see him put this theme at the centre of his New Year message. He says: "We are in the midst of the biggest cost-of-living crisis in a generation. Whether it’s people being unable to afford the weekly shop or worried about the gas and electric bill - or saying 'I have always thought of myself as reasonably well off but I’m really having trouble making ends meet'.

"Somebody said to me the other day 'I can't afford this government'; surely we can do better than this as a country. I think people are hurting, people are wanting us to do better. People are thinking 'look, I've made the sacrifices, where's the benefit? The government keeps telling me that everything is fixed, but it doesn't seem fixed for me.'"

To this, the Tories will reply that Miliband is only talking about living standards because he can't bear to talk about the economy; the rise in growth and the fall in unemployment. But as one senior Labour strategist told me, "For any normal voter, living standards are the economy." Conceding as much, George Osborne's advisers argue that wages are a 'lagging indicator' and that higher output will soon translate into higher salaries. But even if average wages do rise above inflation next year, the gains are likely to be concentrated among high-earners and, as the IFS recently stated, most voters will still be worse off in 2015 than they were in 2010.

But alive to the charge that Labour is too narrowly focused on short-measures, such as the energy price freeze, Miliband offers a preview of what will be one of his key messages in 2014: the need to make "big changes in our economy" in order to ensure that "we can earn and grow our way to a higher standard of living for people." The aim will be to show that Labour has a plan to deliver a permanent, rather than merely a temporary improvement in living standards.

Aware that one of the party's greatest challenges is convincing voters that it can be trusted to manage the public finances, Labour strategists are also keen to emphasise that this won't be achieved through greater borrowing or through endless spending pledges. Miliband says: "People do not want the earth. They would much prefer some very specific promises, specific things about what a government will do - whether it’s freezing energy bills, taking action on pay day lenders, or tackling issues around childcare which lots of working parents face. All of this is adding up to a programme for how we can change things. It’s clearly costed, it’s credible and it’s real."

One of the strengths of his pledge to freeze energy prices is that it does not involve a single pound of public money being spent. For the Tories, the unresolved dilemma remains whether to try and outbid Labour on living standards, or to continue to fight on their preferred terrain of the deficit and GDP.

Perhaps the most striking feature of Miliband's message is his attempt to manage expectations. He ends by stating that there are "no easy answers"  but that Labour would seek to "tip the balance towards hope and away from the struggles that you are facing." Some in Labour are concerned that a Miliband government, forced to make further cuts to public spending and introduce tax rises, could become rapidly unpopular (as Hollande's administration has in France). By emphasising that he won't be able to transform the British economy overnight, Miliband is rightly seeking to counter that danger.

As Jacob Hacker, the US theorist behind 'predistribution' told me earlier this year, "You’re not going to get a big bang of policy change. Instead, what progressives need to do is gain office, do some important things that improve the overall situation of the squeezed middle, and then get re-elected and repeat." With just 16 months to go until the election, Miliband is nudging Labour towards realism.

Ed Miliband speaks at the Labour conference in Brighton in September. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Show Hide image

How “cli-fi” novels humanise the science of climate change

The paradox is that the harder climate-fiction novels try, the less effective they are.

When the Paris UN Climate Change Conference begins at the end of November, the world’s leaders will review the climate framework agreed in Rio in 1992. For well over 20 years, the world has not just been thinking and talking about climate change, it has also been writing and reading about it, in blogs, newspapers, magazines – and in novels.

Climate change fiction is now a recognisable literary phenomenon replete with its own nickname: “cli-fi”. The term was coined in 2007 by Taiwan-based blogger Dan Bloom. Since then, its use has spread: it was even tweeted by Margaret Atwood in 2013:

It is not a genre in the accepted scholarly sense, since it lacks the plot formulas or stylistic conventions that tend to define genres (such as science fiction or the western). However, it does name a remarkable recent literary and publishing trend.

A 21st-century phenomenon?

Putting a number to this phenomenon depends, partly, on how one defines cli-fi. How much of a novel has to be devoted to climate change before it is considered cli-fi? Should we restrict the term to novels about man-made global warming? (If we don’t, we should remember that narratives about global climatic change are as old as The Epic of Gilgamesh and the Biblical story of the flood.) If we define cli-fi as fictional treatments of climate change caused by human activity in terms of setting, theme or plot – and accept there will be grey areas in the extent of this treatment – a conservative estimate would put the all-time number of cli-fi novels at 150 and growing. This is the figure put forward by Adam Trexler, who has worked with me to survey the development of cli-fi.

This definition also gives us a start date for cli-fi’s history. While planetary climatic change occurs in much 20th-century science fiction, it is only after growing scientific awareness of specifically man-made, carbon-induced climate change in the 1960s and 1970s that novels on this subject emerged. The first is Arthur Herzog’s Heat in 1976, followed by George Turner’s The Sun and the Summer (published in the US as Drowning Towers) in 1987.

At the turn of this century, Maggie Gee and TC Boyle were among the first mainstream authors to publish climate change novels. In this century, we can count Atwood, Michael Crichton, Barbara Kingsolver, Ian McEwan, Kim Stanley Robinson, Ilija Trojanow and Jeanette Winterson as major authors who have written about climate change. The past five years have given us notable examples of cli-fi by emerging authors, such as Steven Amsterdam, Edan Lepucki, Jane Rawson, Nathaniel Rich and Antti Tuomainen.

Creative challenges

Cli-fi is all the more noteworthy considering the creative challenge posed by climate change. First, there is the problem of scale – spatial and temporal. Climate change affects the entire planet and all its species – and concerns the end of this planet as we know it. Novels, by contrast, conventionally concern the actions of individual protagonists and/or, sometimes, small communities.

Added to this is the networked nature of climate change: in physical terms, the climate is a large, complex system whose effects are difficult to model. In socio-cultural terms, solutions require intergovernmental agreement – just what COP21 intends – and various top-down and bottom-up transformations. Finally, there exists the difficulty of translating scientific information, with all its predictive uncertainty, into something both accurate and interesting to the average reader.

Still, cli-fi writers have adopted a range of strategies to engage their readers. Many cli-fi novels could be classified as dystopian, post-apocalyptic or, indeed, both – depicting nightmarish societies triggered by sometimes catastrophic climate events. A future world is one effective way of narrating the planetary condition of climate change.

Some novelists are also careful to underpin their scenarios with rigorous climatic predictions and, in this way, translate science fact into a fictional setting. Kingsolver, who trained as an ecologist, is the best example of this – and Atwood and Robinson are also known for their attempts at making their speculations scientifically plausible. Also, cli-fi novels, particularly those set in the present day or very near future rather than in a dystopian future, tend to show the political or psychological dimensions of living with climate change. Readers can identify with protagonists. To some extent, the global community is represented in fictional everymen or everywomen. Or, often, it is through such characters that science is humanised and its role in combating climate change better understood.

Can cli-fi lead to change?

Could cli-fi affect how we think and act on climate change? The paradox is that the harder cli-fi tries, the less effective it is. Many writers want to inspire change, not insist on it: the line between literature and propaganda is one that most novelists respect. Literature invites us to inhabit other worlds and live other lives. Cli-fi at its best lets us travel to climate-changed worlds, to strive there alongside others and then to return armed with that experience.

In Paris, the UN will seek a global agreement on climate action for the first time in more than 20 years. There is plenty of climate change fiction out there to help provide the mental and psychological space to consider that action.

The Conversation

Adeline Johns-Putra, Reader in English Literature, University of Surrey

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.