Return to: Home | Politics | UK Politics

How Labour can win

Published 17 April 2009

If the government continues as it is now my guess is that voters will machine gun us down as we come over the top of our political trenches once the election is called

My bones ached as the McBride saga unfolded. There is one fundamental difference between being in government and sitting on the opposition benches. In government you can do things. Oppositions are limited to issuing press releases.

Instead of concentrating, say, on three key issues to build a launch pad into the next parliament, we saw from the McBride affair that all too much effort at the very centre of government was devoted to what is euphemistically called ‘negative politics’.

We have a little over a year to go before the next election. If the government continues as it is now, presenting almost no programme, and even less coherence, my guess is that voters will machine gun us down as we come over the top of our political trenches once the election is called. That need not be the outcome.

During this year the government can begin to outline new programmes which would not only give the PLP a sense of direction. Such programmes might also convince the electorate that they were worth developing in the next parliament.

The country is in a perilous economic position. In the immediate future the government will be piling up debt, measured as a proportion of our GDP, more than any other G8 country.

A question in this week’s Spectator asks just how difficult this is going to be. Mega tax increases and massive cuts in public expenditure will be required to bring our national accounts towards balance. Failure to do so may mean the government cannot raise the debt it requires.

But the age of cuts does not preclude radicalism. It does, however, require spending existing budgets much more imaginatively and effectively. Here is a starter for three:

1.) There is precious little time left to counter climate change. Saving the rainforest is the most immediate and important international objective.

British taxpayers are paying goodness knows how much to the World Bank to fund their idiotic campaign. The President of Guyana has said his rainforest is up for sale. Why don’t we re-route the World Bank money to Guyana. Let’s invite other nations to join us and create the first world rainforest park. The government could invite individuals and organisations to join with them in this objective. Tax payers would feel that they were doing something immediate and positive to save the world.

2.) The government has set a course that, over decades, will add 5.5p to the standard rate of tax marginally to increase the value of state pensions. When the reform is complete 40 per cent of pensioners will still be in poverty and it is doubtful whether the government’s scheme will work. The objective is simply pathetic. Why doesn’t the government begin now to implement a reform whereby the ‘new’ money is used to build up a funded scheme to run alongside the existing state pension? The aim would be to take every pensioner out of poverty.

We would have to contribute some of our own money to this objective. But the fund would be owned by us and kept at arm’s length from the government.

Setting us on this course would also be seen as bringing our public accounts into balance. The government would have legislated to abolish, over time, means-tested welfare for pensioners – currently at £15.5 billion.

3.) Droves of school children leave school after twelve years of public investment almost unable to read and write. Through his diploma qualifications Ed Balls is trying to introduce technical education – that aspect crucial for working class children that was never implemented as part of the 1944 Act.

Why aren’t we majoring on this reform? It could be tied in with the rebirth of our apprenticeship system.

We could also, using existing funds, allow young people who, to all intents and purposes, have given up education, official permission to leave school at 14 to begin full-time training as apprentice.

A 14-18 schooling budget comes to £14-22k for each young person. This could be given as personal training endowments to young apprentices.

Why doesn’t the government use Geoffrey Robinson to drive this reform through? I know he is an old buddy of Gordon and Ed Balls and that he backs the New Statesman, but surely that should not be a disqualification if he is the right person?

He never misses a debate in the Commons and speaks with real passion. But at present he is confined to speaking. Why isn’t he given the task today of driving through this reform which is crucial to the country’s long-term prosperity?

I could go on but my word count is up.

Follow Frank Field MP's blog at frankfield.co.uk

Post this article to

4 comments from readers

Conker Burnish
18 April 2009 at 08:22

Fair enough on the rainforest Frank and your idea about pension provision is sane and workable and so I have to wonder just what the hell you are doing in New Labour?

Rightly or wrongly you will be the remembered as the one who was asked to 'think the unthinkable' and once he had done so was , surprisingly, given the boot out and denied any role in the formulation of W & P policy.

In short: you are too sensible, too grown-up for the government that you support.

As for your recommendations on education; how long ago has the idea apprenticeships for 14 year olds been mooted? How many years ago was it that I heard this pragmatic policy being discussed by Conservatives ( and some in New Labour!) who were not wedded to the soft-headed idea that our society needs only those with academic abilities? Why should Ed Balls listen to you now?

Although, to be fair, New Labour hasn't been slow to steal Conservative policies in the past so bereft was it of real policies of its own.

I hardly think that another reform in education is what the country is crying out for now do you?

We also come to the uncomfortable fact that your party in government is simply no longer believed about anything it says.

I speak, sincerely, as someone who has only ever voted for the Labour Party and New Labour just the once in 1997; I have never voted since.

I have been worn down by Blairite betrayals and failure after failure of gimcrack policy announcements, - 'March them to the cashpoint' and 'Pay fatties not to eat junk food' are just two - ,sickening cowardice over the Iraq war and moral vaccuum that those who are elected to serve exist in.

And as for those on the front bench; as there ever been such an uninspiring and shambolic gang of light-weights?

I don't think that I'm alone in feeling this way about New Labour especially among those whom to vote labour was an assumption.

A year is not long enough.

George Laird
18 April 2009 at 12:22

Dear Mr. Field

How can Labour win, is a good question.

Cull of the incompetent and despicable would be a start.

Your seat should be safe 13,000 majority; 16th out of 646.

One of the things I noticed about Labour is how the children of Labour MPs seem to get selected as the best candidate to replace their mother or father.

I guess Labour's “equality” knows no bounds.

Labour doesn't deserve to win the next General Election this is Pre McBride, the socialist hero on a £100k a year.

I should be the typical working class Labour voter, brought up in a gerrymandered Labour ghetto of Glasgow, at the bottom of the heap socially and financially.

Labour preaches equality and social justice but the reality is this is just a smokescreen as I know by bitter personal experience.

If there is a way to punish your party; I would grasp that opportunity with both hands.

I despise the Labour Party.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

johnB
18 April 2009 at 21:54

There is a famous line from a famous British Children's book, "The Wind in the Willows" ( which I doubt that any of the ZaNuLabour types have ever read ) The Prolifigate scion of the make believe animal kingdom, one Toad of Toad hall, carelessly squandered his inheritance with irresponsible spending when confronted with this he exclaimed "Send the bills to McBadger, Mcbadger will always pay!!"

Now the Labour half of the LibLabCon-Federacy Pipes up "Let us massively Increase the Taxes and spend our way out of this bankruptcy" ( he must have been inspired by One Barak Obama another who has never held a private sector job and who preaches the same tune.) Not A word about getting any productive industry back to ACTUALLY PAY all these bills no just raise more money from the rapidly disappearing productive sector of the economy.

One thing that heartens me a supporter of the BNP , is that Field might actually represent the new policy of the Labour Party,.and that they may actually try this in 2009. I can think of no way better to get rid of them forever in 2010

john problem
19 April 2009 at 10:13

June 2010. What a day that will be - there'll be more rejoicing in the streets than on VE Day. Then, Britain fought off fascism - this time we'll have fought off bananadom.