An anti-austerity demonstration in Lisbon in 2014. Photo: Patricia de Melo Moreira/AFP/Getty Images
Show Hide image

Why the left is losing the austerity argument

Unlike voters in Greece, Spain or Ireland, the Portuguese are not turning to left-wing parties – even the moderate mainstream left is failing to turn Portugal’s hardships to its advantage.

In a Lisbon hotel, Portuguese nurses sit, waiting to be interviewed for jobs at an NHS trust in the north of England. “The national health service in Portugal is being destroyed,” says Artur Colares, a 45-year-old trauma nurse. “Many medical professionals are choosing to emigrate.”

Portugal’s health service has been battered by deep spending cuts. Nurses have had their salaries frozen, their overtime pay reduced, their promotions halted and their working week increased by five hours with no change in what they earn.

“Nurses are overstretched, exhausted and demoralised,” says José Carlos Martins, the head of the nurses’ union that staged a two-day national strike for better conditions this month. More than 10,000 nurses have emigrated in the past six years, leaving a shortage of 25,000, according to union figures. The flight of medical and other professionals is just one scar left by the recession that Portugal suffered following an economic adjustment programme overseen by the EU and the IMF in return for a €78bn bailout in 2011.

Since then, emigration has risen to levels unknown since the 1960s, with more than 100,000 people leaving each year. Britain is a leading destination for Portuguese emigrants but unlike the previous generations of rural workers who fled, today the migrants include many skilled young graduates who, after years of state-funded education, cannot find a job at home.

A third of those under 25 are unemployed. Half the university graduates under 35 who have a job are estimated to earn less than €900 a month, with one in three earning no more than €600. Aggrieved, they call themselves “the 500 generation”, referring to the monthly minimum wage, which many bring home by working on short contracts in cafés or call centres.

Greece and Spain, where youth unemployment is even higher, bear similar wounds. But unlike voters in these countries – or in Ireland, another bailed-out country – the Portuguese are not turning to left-wing parties such as the Greeks’ Syriza, Podemos in Spain or the anti-austerity Sinn Fein. Even the moderate mainstream left is failing to turn Portugal’s hardships to its advantage.

Less than four months away from a general election, the centre-left Partido Socialista (PS), the main opposition party, had been expected to be leading comfortably in the polls, with its promise to “turn the page on austerity” and put more money in voters’ pockets by reversing public-sector cuts and lowering taxes.

Yet a recent poll showed the PS fewer than 4 points ahead of the two right-of-centre parties in the coalition government that has presided over four years of austerity. Anti-establishment parties of the Podemos or Syriza variety are, in effect, off the radar here. None polls more than 4.5 per cent. On current voting intentions, neither the ruling coalition nor the PS would have enough support to form a majority government.

Pedro Passos Coelho, Portugal’s centre-right prime minister, has been heartened by David Cameron’s election victory in Britain, noting that it was achieved in spite of “difficult and unpopular measures”. The parallels are clear. Passos Coelho’s message, not unlike George Osborne’s, is that austerity works. Over the past four years, Portugal has turned its big current account deficit into a surplus. The economy has been growing for more than a year and is forecast to expand by 1.7 per cent in 2015 while the budget deficit falls below 3 per cent of GDP for the first time in 15 years.

António Costa, who took up the leadership of the PS last year after resigning as mayor of Lisbon, argues that this is only one side of the bailout coin, achieved at the cost of record unemployment, the worst recession in almost half a century and social hardship. Meanwhile, public debt has risen to 130 per cent of GDP, a level considered unsustainable by many economists.

The PS, however, has toned down its message as the stand-off between the Greek government and its creditors brings out the risk-averse side of Portuguese voters. “Passos Coelho’s message to voters is very simple and effective,” writes the political commentator Teresa de Sousa. “Do you want to put all the sacrifices you have made at risk and lose everything?”

Analysts seeking to explain why Portugal is bucking the trend set by other austerity-hit countries in the eurozone also point to the role of the Communist Party, which often polls as high as 10 per cent of the vote, providing a lightning rod for anti-establishment and anti-austerity dissent while remaining too far outside the mainstream to enter government in alliance with the moderate left.

This article first appeared in the 19 June 2015 issue of the New Statesman, Mini Mao

Getty
Show Hide image

Is defeat in Stoke the beginning of the end for Paul Nuttall?

The Ukip leader was his party's unity candidate. But after his defeat in Stoke, the old divisions are beginning to show again

In a speech to Ukip’s spring conference in Bolton on February 17, the party’s once and probably future leader Nigel Farage laid down the gauntlet for his successor, Paul Nuttall. Stoke’s by-election was “fundamental” to the future of the party – and Nuttall had to win.
 
One week on, Nuttall has failed that test miserably and thrown the fundamental questions hanging over Ukip’s future into harsh relief. 

For all his bullish talk of supplanting Labour in its industrial heartlands, the Ukip leader only managed to increase the party’s vote share by 2.2 percentage points on 2015. This paltry increase came despite Stoke’s 70 per cent Brexit majority, and a media narrative that was, until the revelations around Nuttall and Hillsborough, talking the party’s chances up.
 
So what now for Nuttall? There is, for the time being, little chance of him resigning – and, in truth, few inside Ukip expected him to win. Nuttall was relying on two well-rehearsed lines as get-out-of-jail free cards very early on in the campaign. 

The first was that the seat was a lowly 72 on Ukip’s target list. The second was that he had been leader of party whose image had been tarnished by infighting both figurative and literal for all of 12 weeks – the real work of his project had yet to begin. 

The chances of that project ever succeeding were modest at the very best. After yesterday’s defeat, it looks even more unlikely. Nuttall had originally stated his intention to run in the likely by-election in Leigh, Greater Manchester, when Andy Burnham wins the Greater Manchester metro mayoralty as is expected in May (Wigan, the borough of which Leigh is part, voted 64 per cent for Brexit).

If he goes ahead and stands – which he may well do – he will have to overturn a Labour majority of over 14,000. That, even before the unedifying row over the veracity of his Hillsborough recollections, was always going to be a big challenge. If he goes for it and loses, his leadership – predicated as it is on his supposed ability to win votes in the north - will be dead in the water. 

Nuttall is not entirely to blame, but he is a big part of Ukip’s problem. I visited Stoke the day before The Guardian published its initial report on Nuttall’s Hillsborough claims, and even then Nuttall’s campaign manager admitted that he was unlikely to convince the “hard core” of Conservative voters to back him. 

There are manifold reasons for this, but chief among them is that Nuttall, despite his newfound love of tweed, is no Nigel Farage. Not only does he lack his name recognition and box office appeal, but the sad truth is that the Tory voters Ukip need to attract are much less likely to vote for a party led by a Scouser whose platform consists of reassuring working-class voters their NHS and benefits are safe.
 
It is Farage and his allies – most notably the party’s main donor Arron Banks – who hold the most power over Nuttall’s future. Banks, who Nuttall publicly disowned as a non-member after he said he was “sick to death” of people “milking” the Hillsborough disaster, said on the eve of the Stoke poll that Ukip had to “remain radical” if it wanted to keep receiving his money. Farage himself has said the party’s campaign ought to have been “clearer” on immigration. 

Senior party figures are already briefing against Nuttall and his team in the Telegraph, whose proprietors are chummy with the beer-swilling Farage-Banks axis. They deride him for his efforts to turn Ukip into “NiceKip” or “Nukip” in order to appeal to more women voters, and for the heavy-handedness of his pitch to Labour voters (“There were times when I wondered whether I’ve got a purple rosette or a red one on”, one told the paper). 

It is Nuttall’s policy advisers - the anti-Farage awkward squad of Suzanne Evans, MEP Patrick O’Flynn (who famously branded Farage "snarling, thin-skinned and aggressive") and former leadership candidate Lisa Duffy – come in for the harshest criticism. Herein lies the leader's almost impossible task. Despite having pitched to members as a unity candidate, the two sides’ visions for Ukip are irreconcilable – one urges him to emulate Trump (who Nuttall says he would not have voted for), and the other urges a more moderate tack. 

Endorsing his leader on Question Time last night, Ukip’s sole MP Douglas Carswell blamed the legacy of the party’s Tea Party-inspired 2015 general election campaign, which saw Farage complain about foreigners with HIV using the NHS in ITV’s leaders debate, for the party’s poor performance in Stoke. Others, such as MEP Bill Etheridge, say precisely the opposite – that Nuttall must be more like Farage. 

Neither side has yet called for Nuttall’s head. He insists he is “not going anywhere”. With his febrile party no stranger to abortive coup and counter-coup, he is unlikely to be the one who has the final say.