Ukip's message on the NHS is inconsistent. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Ukip's high command remains confused about the NHS

To outsource or not to outsource?

As Ukip hoovers up increasing support, and a few MPs along the way, it is starting to face a certain level of scrutiny regarding its policies.

The party's lack of consistency on the NHS is a particularly sore subject, following the revelation around the time of last month's by-election of Nigel Farage's enthusiasm back in 2012 for an insurance-based system run by private companies. As his party is now openly attempting to pick up Labour voters, Farage's former thoughts on NHS funding are damaging. So much so that he had to hastily insist that he would keep the NHS free at the point of use, without handing control over to "faceless private-sector companies".

But it's clear confusion about its approach to the health service endures among Ukip's high command. Writing in a column in the Express, Ukip deputy chairman Neil Hamilton suggests he would like to see more NHS outsourcing. He refers to "hopeless public sector procurement practices" compared to the efficiency of running a business in the private sector, and decries the "bloated budget" of the NHS. He concludes:

Unfortunately every time a private sector company produces money-saving ideas Labour and trade union dinosaurs start shroud-waving about NHS privatisation. We need to fight back because NHS inefficiency costs lives. One of them might be yours.

This approach to running the NHS sounds entirely at odds with Farage's recent defensive insistence against outsourcing. He told LBC in September:

The government aren’t just privatising the National Health Service, the Labour government following up the coalition, are privatising, or shall I say outsourcing, virtually everything . . . I actually think the bits of our life that government departments control should actually be controlled and run properly by government departments and not outsourced. So I am against outsourcing, I think we need a massive rethink about the way we’ve outsourced the National Health Service and much, much of what the state used to be competent to do in this country.

What does Ukip's inconsistency on the NHS mean for the election? First, it's clear from the need for Ukip to clear up its policy that Labour is so far successfully making the NHS a key electoral battleground. It is also good news for Labour because enthusiasm from key Ukip figures for outsourcing can give its "Ukip is more Tory than the Tories" attack line credence.

As for the Tories, although it is difficult for them to make popular statements on the health service, it will help them to some extent to have a party to point towards as less trustworthy on health reforms than they are so often accused of being.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

Our union backed Brexit, but that doesn't mean scrapping freedom of movement

We can only improve the lives of our members, like those planning stike action at McDonalds, through solidarity.

The campaign to defend and extend free movement – highlighted by the launch of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement this month – is being seen in some circles as a back door strategy to re-run the EU referendum. If that was truly the case, then I don't think Unions like mine (the BFAWU) would be involved, especially as we campaigned to leave the EU ourselves.

In stark contrast to the rhetoric used by many sections of the Leave campaign, our argument wasn’t driven by fear and paranoia about migrant workers. A good number of the BFAWU’s membership is made up of workers not just from the EU, but from all corners of the world. They make a positive contribution to the industry that we represent. These people make a far larger and important contribution to our society and our communities than the wealthy Brexiteers, who sought to do nothing other than de-humanise them, cheered along by a rabid, right-wing press. 

Those who are calling for end to freedom of movement fail to realise that it’s people, rather than land and borders that makes the world we live in. Division works only in the interest of those that want to hold power, control, influence and wealth. Unfortunately, despite a rich history in terms of where division leads us, a good chunk of the UK population still falls for it. We believe that those who live and work here or in other countries should have their skills recognised and enjoy the same rights as those born in that country, including the democratic right to vote. 

Workers born outside of the UK contribute more than £328 million to the UK economy every day. Our NHS depends on their labour in order to keep it running; the leisure and hospitality industries depend on them in order to function; the food industry (including farming to a degree) is often propped up by their work.

The real architects of our misery and hardship reside in Westminster. It is they who introduced legislation designed to allow bosses to act with impunity and pay poverty wages. The only way we can really improve our lives is not as some would have you believe, by blaming other poor workers from other countries, it is through standing together in solidarity. By organising and combining that we become stronger as our fabulous members are showing through their decision to ballot for strike action in McDonalds.

Our members in McDonalds are both born in the UK and outside the UK, and where the bosses have separated groups of workers by pitting certain nationalities against each other, the workers organised have stood together and fought to win change for all, even organising themed social events to welcome each other in the face of the bosses ‘attempts to create divisions in the workplace.

Our union has held the long term view that we should have a planned economy with an ability to own and control the means of production. Our members saw the EU as a gravy train, working in the interests of wealthy elites and industrial scale tax avoidance. They felt that leaving the EU would give the UK the best opportunity to renationalise our key industries and begin a programme of manufacturing on a scale that would allow us to be self-sufficient and independent while enjoying solid trading relationships with other countries. Obviously, a key component in terms of facilitating this is continued freedom of movement.

Many of our members come from communities that voted to leave the EU. They are a reflection of real life that the movers and shakers in both the Leave and Remain campaigns took for granted. We weren’t surprised by the outcome of the EU referendum; after decades of politicians heaping blame on the EU for everything from the shape of fruit to personal hardship, what else could we possibly expect? However, we cannot allow migrant labour to remain as a political football to give succour to the prejudices of the uninformed. Given the same rights and freedoms as UK citizens, foreign workers have the ability to ensure that the UK actually makes a success of Brexit, one that benefits the many, rather than the few.

Ian Hodon is President of the Bakers and Allied Food Workers Union and founding signatory of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement.