Sold short

If you plan to exploit vulnerable people through a shameful confidence trick, it is generally best not to shout about it in the national press. Sadly this ProTip was not passed on to a Mr Carl Cooper of CarSmart in Kent. Mr Cooper’s little scam was to predate on those desperately seeking work, and to pay them at the miserly rate of £50 per week. In case you missed that, that’s for a whole weeks work, it’s not even a daily rate. Its £2.50 an hour, below the legal minimum wage and well below a living wage. Thankfully all his victims had the common sense to tell him where to get off – not one of them turned up.

Mr Cooper is a cruel and selfish individual. He has attempted to take advantage of a high unemployment rate to undermine basic working conditions and to exploit desperate people. You might think it unfair to single him out for criticism; he is just one greedy self-serving individual among many.  Maybe I would have dismissed him if it had been just the confidence trick. One obscure tinpot little company out in the sticks barely registers on the global scale of corporate injustice. But because Mr Cooper was outwitted by seven unemployed people he’d so clearly thought beneath him, he decided to launch a smear campaign.

This is why you may have read about Mr Cooper in the gutter press, in the corrupt Murdoch tabloids, in the hate-soaked columns of the Mail, and on the front page of Friday’s Metro (which presumably no unemployed person is expected to read). Bitter at being outwitted by dole scum, he has decided to add to the drip-drip of hateful propaganda against them. I’m going to look specifically at the Sun, that bastion of working class divide-and-rule. Mr Cooper looks bemused around his soulless office, making awkward half eye contact and sporting one of those ‘70s style striped shirts with plain collars that David Steel used to wear. Apparently the hired staff failed to turn up because of rain, not that any evidence or testimony is given to prove this. In all likelihood Mr Cooper plucked it gracefully from his arse. Then the real slurs begin.

A picture worth taking up darts for.

The general assumption made by Mr Cooper is that the potential employees were “work-shy”. In fact, throw in all the tired clichés you can think of. Draw an elegant but oh so two-dimensional caricature if you please. It’s so much easier than genuine analysis – you don’t even need evidence. To quote “Stunned Carl”: “I cannot believe that these layabouts can have such a pathetic attitude to a day’s labour”. The measured tones of a decent chap, I’m sure you’ll agree. For the real reason why not one of the seven did not turn up, Mr Cooper need only look at the pay he was offering. Did it ever occur to him that it isn’t work, or even the specific type of work that people object to, it’s the insulting poverty pay?

£50 a week is well below the poverty line for a single person. Subtract travel costs and its questionable as to whether anyone could afford to remain alive on such a sum. “Even the basic pay for fulfilling the minimum requirements of the work would be double what they could get on Jobseekers Allowance” is Mr Cooper’s justification. With such an evidently poor grasp of basic maths, I could fear for the financial future of his business, if I cared. For comparison the JSA rate for under 25’s is £56 a week. From experience I can say that it’s certainly a struggle keeping the Koi carp pond stocked on 56 quid. Alternatively it’s “too generous” if you agree with Mr Cooper, which I don’t. People are indeed better off on the dole, but in the way that the ‘flu is better than the Black Death.

Would I rather pay people to stay on the dole? Well yes actually, yes I would. As a taxpayer, I would much rather pay to support someone in looking for work on their own terms; work that will be suited to their talents, complement their general well-being, and ideally be of a credit to wider society. I would favour this even more so if the alternative is to force the desperate into an exploitative working relationship with the Carl Coopers of this world, encouraging a race to the bottom for wages in a sweatshop economy. I would see the end of parasitical businesses like CarSmart. What a beautiful irony it would be if Mr Cooper found himself unemployed; would his Just World philosophy survive? Would he continue to think of himself as superior to “those people” when he’s stacking shelves for free in the Darwinian future he encourages?

“The benefit system rewards people for doing nothing” says Carl. No mate, it protects them from abusive scumbags like yourself.

Chris Grayling to reduce unemployment by One.

Chris Grayling, in case you didn’t already know, is the Member of Parliament for Epsom and Ewell, and Minister of State at the Department for Work and Pensions. He is also a lying bastard and has dreadful communication skills. His efforts tackling the worst unemployment among young people in generations have been lacklustre to say the least. He, alongside faux-compassionate conservative Iain Duncan Smith, is the government’s standard bearer for punitive schemes designed to punish and exploit the unemployed. He has used his position of power and privilege to slander and misrepresent the characters and causes of anyone who dares speak against him. When the inequities of his schemes are highlighted, he resorts to spin and bare faced lies. In short, he is an evil, hateful, immoral little man.

Image

The quite excellent Johnny Void documents more fully Grayling and the DWP’s shameful back-story. Today I come to credit Grayling. In between selling our youth as slaves and branding the Archbishop of Canterbury a militant Trotskyite, he has successfully created one new job. Just the one. Here [link].

I know from experience that jobs working for MPs can receive hundreds of applications for a single position. In this case there may be fewer, given what any politically aware unemployed person will know about Grayling. But if Hell itself were looking for part-time bar staff, even Satan might receive CVs from desperate job hunters. When hundreds of people apply for one position, 99% of those are mathematically guaranteed to be unsuccessful. How will Grayling reconcile these masses of doomed applicants with his wider responsibility for policy? Will he realise that his hateful ideology is wrong in blaming individuals for economic circumstances far beyond their control?

Here’s an idea. The deadline for this job is not until Monday (23rd). The essential qualifications and requirements are actually very low. Any young person who has passed a handful of GCSEs could, with a minimal amount of on the job training, perform the advertised role. I’m going to apply. You should to. So should everyone who is currently unemployed, and even those who aren’t but who will need a job in the near future. We’re all qualified. Assuming that the position is filled on a loosely meritocratic basis, we should all have a fair chance of consideration.

If, by Monday morning, Grayling’s office inbox is fit to bursting with job applications (“the standard was very high”) then maybe, just maybe, he’ll start to consider the massive competition that exists for even the most basic of jobs. Maybe he’ll begin to appreciate just how many individuals are trapped in limbo by a lack of opportunities. Maybe (and this is a long shot) he’ll cut us some slack, stop using his departmental jackboot to bully and intimidate, and start creating real jobs, beyond making cups of tea in his constituency office.

It won’t take long. Thirty minutes to draft a covering letter, and any good student/graduate job-hunter should have a CV to hand, one that can be appropriately tweaked. Grayling may endorse lying, but I encourage honesty, these should be genuine applications. I could put an example here, but several hundred individual submissions will carry far more weight than a thousand copy and pastes. Apply. Apply now! If you’re really lucky – and I mean really lucky – you might just end up working for the Right Honourable Member.

The ad in full (courtesy of w4mpjobs):

Image

The Bankers’ Budget

Nobody would expect a fair budget from George Osborne. The Chancellor was never going to give a budget that benefitted the many over the few, or one that put the realities of everyday life above right-wing economic dogma. Expectations suitably adjusted, we can perhaps take small comfort from the 50p tax band “only” being cut to 45p. Ed Miliband gave a sterling speech in response, and I raise a glass to the intern who wrote the jokes. Professional hacks will be casting their own analysis; what follows is my personal take on some of the details.
 
The Chancellor’s big spin on this budget is that it “rewards work”.  We already know that under-18s are to endure a cut in the minimum wage. In the UK it is possible to work a 40-hour week and still live in poverty. The way to make work pay is, surprisingly enough, to actually make work pay, by implementing a proper living wage. Today we heard no commitment on improving the pay of the low paid. It would be naive to ever expect one from a Tory Chancellor. Increasing the income tax threshold seems reasonable, but not when even the poorest are still hit by VAT, and duty on fuel, alcohol and tobacco. What Osborne gives with one hand, he takes several times over with the other.
 
Projections for economic growth and for a fall in unemployment are welcomed.I only hope they hold true. As far as I am aware the budget made no specific commitments relating to the latter. I fear that further cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions will only result in more inhumane box-ticking and the harassment of the vulnerable. The Government – as ever – has put all its faith in the hands of the wonderful private sector.
 
On the 50p rate, the detail most comprehensively leaked, news was always going to be disappointing. Having endured two years of the government chaffing on about deficit reduction, one could at least have assumed that they intended to maximise tax revenue. Basic maths will tell anyone that a 50p rate will raise more by its presence than its absence (“Laffer Curve” / wishful thinking / pseudoscience aside). Osborne himself stated that the rate raised around £1 billion. To me a lot, to him “next to nothing”. Cutting it will cost £100m. That’s a lot of disabled children who will have to go without.
 
The moral case for the 50p rate is even more clear cut – there can be no reason why someone “earning” in excess of £150,000 per year needs a penny more. Greed can be the only motive, and the one which leads to tax evasion and avoidance. It will be argued that such non-payment means that the tax rate might as well be cut. Just apply this same rational to other crimes such as burglary and murder – “You’re never going to catch every criminal, might as well legalise it!” – to see what a fallacy it is.
 
Tax evasion is “morally repugnant” according to Osborne. It is hard to shake off that dirty feeling that comes from agreeing with him – especially given those are often my own words. Tax evasion, and avoidance, are both morally reprehensible. They are as much a theft from the community as your typical off-licence robbery, in scale perhaps more so. The problem is that Osborne is the last person I would expect to do anything about it. I fear that despite pledges to the contrary, he will be all talk and no trousers. Every spending decision taken thus far by the government has convinced me that it is a government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
 
Miliband’s best line came when he challenged the government front bench to admit who among them personally benefit from the budget. Furthermore it is worth considering how many prominent Tory donors will also benefit. Such borderline conflict of interest makes a mockery of democracy – and will certainly not be reported in the Tory press. The headlines will trumpet crumbs from the rich men’s table, and ignore the widening inequality that will be a direct result of Osborne’s decisions.
 
Labour should commit to restoring the 50p band, and to actually getting serious on tax fraud, just as we should commit to renationalising the NHS. Anything less will be to continue to concede to the rightward drift of our national political discourse.
By Chris Nash

Growth and all that jazz

Chris Riddell's Observer comment cartoon 15.08.10

Sorry for the break in blogging, we’re trying to up the ante this year

Probably the most pressing of all news items is the recent dismal growth figures. Over a year ago when Cameron and Osborne claimed we were “Out of the woods” and “Out of the danger zone”. How very wrong they were. With the final quarter of 2011 seeing a contraction of 0.2% this then means that in the last 15 months since Osborne’s Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) in October 2010, we’ve had a massive 0.3% of growth. Cameron then has the audacity to blame the recent growth figures on the Euro crisis. Well I’m sorry, the UK economy has been stagnating long before the crisis began to effect.

Cameron you said it yourself, “I take full responsibility for everything that happens in the economy.” then take responsibility and change course!

Max

We hate to say we told you so

28.11.11 Martin Rowson

Today we saw Gideon (George Osborne) unveil his first ever Autumn Statement (last year it was a Comprehensive Spending Review) which used to be Brown and then Darling’s Pre-Budget Report, although it’s still the same thing more or less.

What we saw today was a Chancellor willing to blame everyone except himself for his own failures. Gideon may claim as much as he likes that the growing crisis in the Eurozone may have put a dent in its works, but that would just be disingenuous as it’s not at that stage to truly have an impact on a non-Eurozone country such as the UK.

But in a nutshell what we had is:

  1. Growth forecasts for UK economy cut 0.9% this year and 0.7% next year (And we all know you can’t truly get the deficit down without growth)
  2. Borrowing forecasts revised up – an extra £111bn to be borrowed over five years (This was the one thing they set about to do, this was the be all and end all test of the Coalition and they are set to fail upon it)
  3. Pay cap of 1% for public sector workers once two-year pay freeze ends (Which is really going to encourage consumer confidence and spending, the true engine of economic growth)
  4. Unemployment to rise from 8.1% this year to 8.7% next year and more public sector jobs forecast to go – 710,000 over five years (Again, nothing new there)
  5. Credit easing and numerous infrastructure projects (I will welcome these, but it’s rather ironic after 18 months of austerity mantra)
  6. January rise in regulated rail fares to be capped at 6.2%, not 8.2% (While this is certainly better but as a semi-regular rail user, this needs to be below RPI, 5%, we already have the most expensive rail fares in Europe)
  7. Doubling of free childcare places for deprived two-year-olds to 260,000 in England (The one true policy I’m sure we can all get behind)
  8. 3p fuel duty rise due in January to be delayed or frozen (Which is still entirely negated with the rise in VAT in January)
  9. Bank levy to be increased (Which is all very well but not when you remember this is balanced out with the cut in Corporation Tax)

So essentially, we have growth being revised down for the fourth time in 18 months and borrowing expected to be £111 billion higher in 2015.

So when Gideon said “we are out of the danger zone.” around a year ago I didn’t think we’d get around to us saying “we told you so” so soon.

Max

An Englishman’s Home is… beyond his wildest dreams

For some reason, going back into the mists of time, the British people have an obsession with private home ownership, even though most of us should technically never be able to afford one without borrowing. In Continental Europe, people are far more satisfied to rent, either from private landlords or more ‘trustworthy’ institutions – maybe there is some correlation between these statistics and the lower levels of stress and dissatisfaction there compared to the UK.

Nevertheless, we are where we are, and there is no going back on the ‘Right to Buy’ scheme introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1981 however much we might want to reverse it (indeed, many of us may actually agree with it, being as it was extremely popular with the low paid, who for the first time had a stake in their council homes and some sense of freedom, however delusional). What we have now is a housing crisis coming at the worst possible time, during a dire economic climate caused by sub-prime mortgages themselves.

Tensions over housing and its’ availability have an effect on many areas of life, including levels of antagonism towards immigrants, the environment, growth, inequality in our cities, personal debt, and of course the Daily Mail and Daily Express front pages. We need to deal with this timebomb if we are to stem a rise in far-right politics and avoid a lost generation of young people. However, worryingly this government is going about it completely the wrong way.

Not only has it made squatting illegal when there are more empty properties than there are homeless people in this country, but it has appallingly placed a cap on housing benefit, effectively pricing the poor out of our capital city and entire swathes of the country – those parts of the country which have job vacancies. The government is slashing the public sector and saddling young people who go to university with ever higher debt, meaning their chances of even being able to look forward to putting down a deposit are negligible.

What our housing market needs is a Keynesian-style investment in house building and construction; not only would this lower house prices for first-time buyers, but it would also ease tensions in the community and increase demand in the economy generally, leading to growth and the beginning of the end of the deficit that the ConDems love to remind us about so much. As a bonus, it would even lead to a return of Location Location Location to our TV screens. Gordon Brown’s plan before the proverbial shit hit the fan in 2007 was to build 3 million new homes – we need this sort of commitment now, coupled with a healthy proliferation of 1940s-inspired New Towns (hopefully better designed than the likes of Milton Keynes) and more social housing. Today’s announcement from Cameron and Clegg about guaranteeing 95% mortgages may look like a repetition of exactly what went wrong in the first place, but should not be dismissed entirely, as it is the taxpayer, not the banks, helping first-time buyers, and there is real potential for an increase in demand as a result.

However it goes nowhere near far enough. If we can’t get people to fall out of love with the owner-occupier dream, then we need to build, build, build, spending more money in the short term to get us out of the mess in the long term.

3 million, I wouldn’t rule it out

Yesterday we saw a good sign in the economy that inflation had fallen from 5.2% to 5%. We welcome it but it’s still not good enough, especially when Eurozone inflation has remained at a reasonable 3%. It seems however, this is rather irrelevant with the news released today by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) where unemployment has risen to 2.62 million from July to September.

That’s right, the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer who over a year ago claimed “we were out of the woods” now had the audacity to have one of their Ministers for Work and Pensions, Chris Grayling, claim that ”What we’ve seen over the last quarter has been the real impact of the crisis in the eurozone”. That’s right, they’re blaming their old punch bag, Europe. Don’t get me wrong, the crisis in the Eurozone is severe, but it in now way at a stage to make a real impact on unemployment figures, especially in a non-Euro state.

With the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance rising to 1.6 million by 5,300. The highest number of women out of work since February 1988 at 1.09 million rising by 43,000. Youth unemployment breaking the 1 million mark at 1.02 million with a rising by 67,000 and the unemployment rate of 8.3% being the highest since 1996 and the total number of unemployed people the highest since 1994, it’s about time Cameron and Gideon took another look at their plan.

Max

The pressure mounts

With inflation around 5%, consumer confidence falling for four months on the trot, business confidence falling to a two year low, growth flat-lining in the past 9 months and growth expectations themselves being cut, you would have thought Gideon (George) Osborne would think things could not get any worse.

Well apparently they can. It seems 100 leading economists have written into the Observer to tell Gideon to adopt a plan B. Now while letters like this have been done in the past, the difference being that this time it has an alternative outline. It’s an alternative Miliband and Balls should take head to:

  1. An immediate halt to cuts, to protect jobs in the public sector. (Although I wouldn’t not cut entirely, for one, I’d cut the renewal of Trident).
  2. A new round of quantitative easing but the money wouldn’t go to the banks. Rather to finance a “Green New Deal” to create thousands of new jobs.
  3. Benefit increases to put money into the pockets of those on lower and middle incomes and give a boost to spending.
  4. A financial transaction tax to raise funds from the City to pay for investment in transport, energy and house building. (Robin Hood Tax anyone?)
  5. Introduce a truly progressive tax system so that those at the bottom don’t face the greatest burden proportionately (Or simply having the rich pay their taxes will be a start)
  6. Introduce a tax on land value to increase revenue and reduce the possibility of another debt-fuelled housing price boom.
  7. Copy South Korea and China’s model of state assistance for industry by creating a British investment bank. (Something that Lord Mandelson was beginning to champion in the last year of the Labour Government)
  8. Invest in transport and infrastructure to create jobs, but also to encourage people out of their cars and into trains or on to bicycles
  9. Judge the economy not on whether there is growth in GDP, but on a new catch-all criterion that takes into account the desire for minimal unemployment, and for work-life balance, economic and social stability, and job satisfaction.
So Gideon, even though we know you wont, please take heed of the recommendations. Simply living in the nostalgia of a failed plan of the early 1980s wont guarantee success. And Miliband and Balls, these recommendations should be the essence of your policy review, take them on board!
Max

We told you so

Going to use a bit of the Brigid Jones BULS blog formula this morning.

It turns out there’s going to be the biggest drop in middle-income families incomes since the 1970s and so pushing 600,000 more children into poverty according to the IFS. This is while Gideon (George) Osborne has announced a £840 million tax break for multinationals using tax heavens while it turns out the amount of tax money lost in the FTSE 100 by tax avoidance is estimated to be £18bn. So much for the cuts being “progressive”.

To insult to misery, it turns out public sector job losses will 50% higher than originally predicted. So much for Cameron’s pre-election claim that any Minister who came to him with front-line public sector cuts would be told to go back and have a rethink.

Max

The expectation

After Gideon’s (Osborne’s) low-key and rather dull speech at the Tory Conference today where he claimed his economic plan to be working and even, dare I say it, “flexible”. I’d like to draw attention to the only aspect of Gideon’s plan that has so far proved to be “flexible”, the growth expectations  by the IMF over the last 6 months or so, curtsey of LabourList:

IMF osborne effect.JPG

The fact is, the CBI, the IMF and now even some Tory backbenchers and Chairs of Treasury select committees have called for a plan for growth or at least attempts to stimulate it. Like we said a few weeks ago, a temporary cut in VAT would be a huge stimulus as pointed out by the IFS.

It seems Gideon was only really to parade the the low interest rates in his speech, but with the abysmal growth over the last year or so, it seems we may have a rise in interest rates regardless if growth doesn’t pick up.

So please Gideon, think again.

Max

Priorities please

It was announced yesterday (I think) that the UK has rejected a call by the EU to implement a financial tax of a mere 0.01% on bank transactions which could raise £50 billion a year.

I’d like to draw your attention to a video posted on this blog before about the absurdity of the Coalition decision to oppose the so-called ‘robin-tax hood’.

Enjoy

Max

 

Clegg is Not For Turning

Yesterday Nick Clegg made a speech to the Liberal Democrat conference which was steadfast and robust in defence of the coalition’s economic policy, despite the depressing evidence this week that the economy isn’t changing course either from its current trajectory of nowhere. He promised there would be no turning back on the cuts and auterity, however many jobs are lost and however many people struggle to make ends meet thanks to the VAT rise and inflation.

Does this sound familar? It should. For although it is right that things never completely run in parallel, it is indeed the case that history may never repeat itself, but it rhymes. It was around this stage in the political and economic cycle – at a party conference – that Margaret Thatcher made the infamous ‘Lady’s not for turning’ speech. Then the UK witnessed riots on the streets, rampant unemployment, a royal wedding, a foreign intervention and a belligerent government hell-bent on destroying the fabric of our society. I barely exaggerate. Even shoulder pads are making something of a comeback in 2011.

However, maybe now is more like 1931, with a prolonged slump looming, a currency mechanism collapsing at the same time as the US economy, a rise in far right extremism and little help for the poor and jobless.We seem to be heading for continued gloom because of the Con Dems’ obsession with cutting the deficit too far and too fast, stifling growth and productivity and making the situation worse for all of us. Although they have won welcome concessions from the Tories on some issues, on the fundamentals Nick Clegg needs to wake up and pull out of this marriage of convenience for the sake of his party in future but also for the country. Just as in 1981 and 1931, ordinary people feel that overall Britain is going in the wrong direction or is in the doldrums - the only thing that would change that elusive yet crucial feeling of a lack of confidence is investment on Keynesian terms to jump-start the economy, a fall in VAT and a slower trimming of the excess we built up saving the banks from collapse. Unfortunately though it seems the Cleggy’s not for turning.

Living Wage Campaign

We won’t be able to post a full blog for a few nights given most of us are preparing for the Societies fare tomorrow and Friday. So we’d like to quickly share National Labour Students new campaign for a Living Wage. Like the minimum wage, it’s such a small act that can achieve so so much. I’m sure most in BULS can and will support this brilliant new campaign.

Max

9/11 Ten Years On, Coalition Politics and Blood Donation

9/11 – A Warning from Recent History

For someone of the age of the current crop of Labour Students, it is particularly difficult to believe that it is ten years tomorrow since the lives of millions were changed forever on September 11th, 2001. Most of us were still in primary school at the time, and it is perhaps apt that our generation – one that was constantly told we were growing up too fast – had our innocence of the world around us robbed so suddenly on that bright Tuesday morning. Hearing and seeing the images of the planes hitting the World Trade Center still transfixes all of us, and as much as we might want to look away having seen enough, we can’t quite bring ourselves to stop watching.

However it is our generation – the 9/11 generation – who will be the politicians and headline-makers of the coming years, and if anything good can come of the last decade, it is surely the lesson  that those in power have a responsibility not to overreact when faced with such onslaughts. Our party’s most successful leader (in electoral terms) no doubt had good intentions, but made the grave error of marching the troops gung-ho into an unplanned and illegal war, probably creating a whole new generation of terrorists in the process, while at home him and those around him were complicit in eroding many of the freedoms we were meant to be protecting, including detention without charge and freedom from torture. If the horror of terrorism reaches us again, we must pause and assess the causes before acting. The same rule should apply for other crises, like the riots this summer.

Backbench Tories Have Nothing To Worry About

Today is the final day of the Plaid Cymru autumn conference in Llandudno, north Wales. The outgoing leader, Ieuan Wyn Jones, made his final conference speech yesterday after an electoral drubbing for the nationalist party in the Welsh Assembly elections in May. Unlike in Scotland, where the SNP have been successful, he argued that coalition government in Cardiff Bay (of which Plaid was the junior party) meant Plaid’s achievements in government were smothered by Labour, and that the party was punished by voters for not claiming credit for them.

Aside from the fact that Plaid achieved very little in government in a time of economic turmoil other than a referendum with poor turnout which managed to bore even political anoraks, their experience in coalition should serve as a lesson to Westminster politics. This week Tory backbenchers, angry over law and order, Europe and abortion, moaned that the Lib Dem ‘tail’ was wagging the Tory ‘dog’ and that Nick Clegg was being given too many concessions by the Prime Minister. However come the election in 2015, the Tories will have nothing to worry about, as the voters are likely to give them sole credit for any successes – particularly if the economy picks up (not a given considering Osborne’s slash-and-burn approach) – and they will certainly not be looking to make some sort of permanent alliance with the Lib Dems, contrary to what some commentators are predicting. The coalition dog will probably have his tail docked when the voters are next given a choice.

About Bloody Time

This week the ban on gay and bisexual men giving blood for life in Britain was finally overturned (although you’d be forgiven for not noticing the leap forward because the BBC thought Strictly Come Dancing was more important on the news bulletins that night). This is a triumph that equality campaigners have been working tirelessly for for years, and at last gay men will be able to save lives and help tackle the urgent need for more donors. No more will the official policy imply that gay men cannot be trusted to practice safe sex and ‘probably have HIV’.

Although the ban was only replaced with a one-year time lag since a donor’s last encounter, it is still progress, and puts us more in line with the situation in similar countries.

Screw tax cuts to the rich. The 20% VAT should go!

Our opposites in BUCF have today signalled the call for an idea which has been floating around for a few years now. Scrapping the 50p tax rate for those earning over £150,000 a year. Now this is all very well, I think everyone can agree that governments ought to do their best to keep taxation as low as they can depending on the expenditure, but to say “Getting rid of the 50p tax is not a tax break for the rich, but a common sense policy to stimulate growth and encourage positivity in investment.” is something I’m going to have disagree with BUCF’s former-President.

Keeping interests rates low and cutting taxes for “entrepreneurs” may be all very well, but it counts for nothing if there’s no expenditure from the general population. This is what’s happening now, with the greatest squeeze on household finances for two years due to rising inflation, benefit cuts and of course the regressive rise in VAT (which heavily contributed to the rise in inflation), it is no wonder retail salesconstruction and growth expectations are down.

Now of course, this post is completely leaving aside the fact that the 50% tax band will raise an additional £12.6 billion over five years according to Treasury figures . The real point of this post is why not cut VAT again instead? The IFS itself said that this was an effective stimulus for consumer spending (the real power of growth) when VAT was briefly cut to 15% in 2009.

And also, on a more simplistic note, to cut taxes for the rich, and yes millionaires as well, at a time when household incomes are being squeezed is nothing less than insulting for those struggling to pay the bills.

Max

Why Turn Blue When Just ‘Labour’ Will Do?

As Ed Miliband gathers opinions and considers the future policy direction of the Labour party as part of the Policy Review, there has been much debate recently about whether or not to pursue ‘Blue Labour’, as proposed by the academic and Labour peer Maurice Glasman. Blue Labour, a response to ‘Red Toryism’, aims to put co-operatives and the community at the heart of the lives of ordinary British people, and is a rebuttal of New Labour’s strangling embrace of neo-liberalism, which left swathes of grassroots Labour supporters feeling alienated and ignored by the party leadership.

Glasman has a point, for throughout the history of the ‘people’s party’ there has been a split between liberals, state socialists and those who favour co-operatives and more local organisation – many Labour MPs today are also members of the Co-operative Party, and since its inception at the turn of the twentieth century the Labour movement has been associated with local organisation and mobilisation.

Martin Pugh in his 2009 book “Speak for Britain: A New History of the Labour Party” argues persuasively that the real dilemma for Labour through its history has not been attracting liberal support, but attracting hard-working but low-paid voters from the temptations of the Conservatives: many ordinary working class communities share the Tories’ patriotism; love of the armed forces (many of them have close relatives or friends serving in Afghanistan); desire for home ownership and a tough stance on law and order – why did so many vote for Margaret Thatcher in 1979, read the Daily Mail, and in a few cases drift to more extreme parties through fear of their jobs because of immigration and globalisation? Pugh stresses that when Labour came into being many voters were torn between it and the Tories because of these economic concerns, plus social beliefs like temperance or the role of the Church in schools.

Where Glasman takes the wrong path, in my view, is in his attempt to respond to Cameron’s Big Society by mimicking it and advocating a further retrenchment of the state, along with a return to a 1950s-style focus on the family, the flag, and feminism being almost unheard-of. That’s not ‘Blue Labour’, that’s just conservatism. If we as social democrats want to see equality of provision across the board, we need to expose the Big Society for what it is: a cover for cuts dreamt up by Steve Hilton when the Tories needed to be seen to be shedding the aura of Thatcherism.

If Labour is to win elections again without ditching our principles – to do so would be an insult to people like the families of those killed in Norway – we need to ‘re-connect with the grassroots,’ to use the spin-doctors jargon, by addressing, or at the very least appreciating, the legitimate concerns of the hard-working folk who keep the economy growing and keep money coming into the Exchequer. Instead of Big Society initiatives, we need to take the lead on key issues like housing, providing ample employment for deprived communities and young people generally, and not simply dismissing people’s concerns about migration and welfare dependency. That does not mean leaving the EU, saying we should only have British jobs for British workers, or undertaking humiliating fit-for-work tests like those currently going on under Iain Duncan Smith. It just means listening to those too well-off to be on benefits but on low wages, as well as staying true to  proud values like tolerance. If we go some way to pointing out these worries in opposition, whilst criticising the Con-Dems’ unfair cuts, the sought-after swing voters will follow, and we may just wake up to find ourselves in government again.

All things economic

Sorry for the lack of blogging in the past couple of weeks, I myself have been working almost full-time with a work-placement on the side. Anyway, I’d like to focus on two of the biggest economic updates in a news dominated by the ongoing phone hacking scandal. The up coming growth figures for Tuesday and the situation over the debt talks in the USA.

First off, who needs a plan B, right? Judging by what is being said by the likes of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR) this stubbornness is not quite paying off. The GDP growth figures are mainly regarded as the be and end all test for a government’s economic credibility. To meet budget forecasts for growth this year the UK will need 0.8% of that well needed boost. What the NIESR is predicting the Office for National Statistics to actually say is that the UK has grown by a mere 0.1% with some City forecasts predicting a contraction.

Now don’t get me wrong, here in BULS we are capable of recognising that the Chancellor (Gideon) can not control every aspect of the economy. The rise in oil and food prices and the growing concern over the Eurozone crisis aren’t the greatest assets ever. In fact, the idea of austerity does have the vague potential to work, as seen in Canada in the 90s and in the UK in the 80s. But these are totally dependant upon favourable economic circumstances in neighbouring nations such as Europe and the USA. Sadly though, we currently don’t have those circumstances. We don’t have secure and confident markets in Europe and the USA and this is something Gideon totally fails to grasp. Cutting spending to reduce the deficit is all very well but once again, it’s pointless without growth to fuel this deficit reduction and with average pay rising at 2.3% and inflation at 4.2% (thank you VAT hike) this recovery is still far from certain.

Turning our attention over across the Atlantic it seems Federal government has seen a roadblock to progress because of dogged stubbornness with Republican House Speaker John Boehner walking out on a crucial debt talks with Senate leaders and the White House. Now anyone who’s studied the US governmental and political structure will always recognise that it is a system based upon compromise. With an increasingly ideologically driven Republican based House of Representatives, Obama has had to make drastic compromises in the name of reaching a deal for the good of America.

The President has already pledged to double his cuts particularly in the area of medicare which many supporters (such as myself) are completely aghast at, with $650bn of extra cuts pledged recently. Either way, this is a man who will attempt to build the bridge with his conservative law-makers. Sadly, it takes two to build a bridge and this is not what we are seeing from the Republican end of the river who refuse to raise any taxes (I thought they were rather keen on deficit reduction?). The Republicans have increasingly gone down the road of stubbornness in the past few years, but now it’s time to walk the walk as well as talk the talk as they put aside ideological differences. Sadly, given the ever increasing grip of the Tea Party, I doubt this much needed maturity will happen any time soon.

Max

The Euro Takes A Pounding

The single currency was once such a contentious issue; only a decade ago it seemed likely that the UK would be joining the Eurozone. What happened? Today, Jack Straw predicted that the Euro will indeed fail following the inevitable defaulting by Greece of its sovereign debt, leading to a return to those old holiday favourites like the Drachma. As the media keeps reminding us ominously, despite our not being part of the monetary union, a collapse of the Euro would have a devastating effect on our economy, because of the global nature of our trade regime and our over-reliance on our closest neighbours for exports. This begs the question that if we cannot escape the effects of these sorts of economic crises in a globalised world, is it not time to become more unified to prevent the two-track system we have at the moment, where richer nations are being forced to bail out those in trouble?

I am no economist, yet if I learned anything from my second-year Interwar Economy course (between lapses into and out of a coma), it is that the attempt to ‘force’ currencies of varying strengths to use the same interest rates as part of the Gold Standard was in hindsight a fairly disastrous decision, without some sort of accompanying political union where individual nations have the same tax-and-spending and trade regimes – like BULS members’ attitudes to musical theatre, it seems we can only be either completely pro or completely anti EU. Given that Labour is a progressive party, and that in today’s global economy an insular economic nationalism is unthinkable (we have no industry for that), is it not the time to at least ‘float’ the idea of some sort of European federal state, if we are to keep the post-war dream alive?

This idea may be too much for many people to swallow, and the media will never accept it, but do we really have any realistic alternative when we are competing with economies like China and India? We cannot afford to let the European ideal crumble on the back of this financial crisis.

Luke

And who says we don’t have policies

Back in 2008 the Institute of Fiscal Studies concluded that the 2.5% cut in VAT that year was an effective tax-cutting stimulus measure particularly for consumers. Now since the welcome rise in retail spending by 1.1% in April there has been a complete reversal of that fortune with retail spending dropping by 1.4% in May. In the light of the recent figures (yup we can flexible, unlike some) Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls has called on for an emergency tax cut and another repeat of the one off tax on Bankers bonuses to raise £2bn of which most would go towards creating 25,000 affordable homes which is still a pressing problem after a decade of rising house prices.

Now this is quite important as much as I personally am a fan of the two Eds, we do need to create a very very broad economic narrative before the policy review is completed. And this is a good and welcome first step.

Max

The IMF and economists

A week ago certain sections of the blogosphere, Facebook and Twitter were filled with gleeful comments about the IMF’s decision to renew its support for the Tory-led Coalition’s austerity measures. This is all fine and dandy, but you first have to look at the significance of the IMF in the world today, which if you look at is a rather poor showing. Yes, traditionally it’s held a high position in international finance, but that literally means or provides nothing (as is the case with “tradition” as a concept). But what we have learnt is that IMF in recent years has had long history badly misinformed perceptions on austerity programmes and the social impact they have which has been clearly the case of African Third World countries where the IMF’s record has been shockingly bad. The IMF has also been blamed for the economic crash in Argentina in 2001 while, most notably of all, the IMF back in 2008/9 backed Ireland’s austerity programme. So naturally, IMF enorsment means very little to me.

On the other hand, what has become apparent (but barely been covered by the BBC) is that a long string of economists that originally back Gideon’s austerity have wisely changed their opinions given the recently poor growth and inflation figures. These professionals are willing to change their minds in the light of new evidence and figures, it’s a shame Gideon is too stubborn to follow suit.

Max

Old news

Right this had to be cleared up. As you probably know the Telegraph recently published leaked documents on Ed Balls’ role in the Gordon Brown’s camps attempt to oust Blair. It seems from the documents that Balls was a primary agitator in the attempts to demand a leaving date from Blair and presenting Brown as a Prime Minister in waiting……..well is any of this new? Of course not! Will it effect his ability to do his job as Shadow Chancellor? Again, of course not! Will it mean Balls will follow a similar path to his former master, Brown and attempt to oust Ed Miliband? Of course not as unlike Blair and Brown, Balls and Miliband actually ran against each other in the leadership election which was conclusively resolved (if you exclude disgruntled sore-loser supporters of David Miliband). And frankly, Labour is far beyond the petty squabbles of the Blair-Brown and is a largely united force unlike after losing power in the 1950s and 1980s. So all of this is totally irrelevant, we have moved on.

There’s also accusations that Balls alongside Brown ignored warnings and continued spending increases well above inflation and so further created a deficit before the crash of 2008. Come off it! These claims were directed around the year of 2006….when Balls was merely a back-bench MP. Of course you have to remember this is coming from the Telegraph and these claims have jumped on by particularly Michael Gove. This is all very well, but Gove fails to mention that Gideon was committed rigorously to Labour’s spending plans up until the 2008 crash and that on the eve of the 2008 crash Brown had a lower deficit than he had inherited back in 1997 as Chancellor.

Max

So much to talk about

Apologises for the lack of  blogging lately. Been rather busy with essays, football match against BUCF (kinda) and general stuff back up north. Anyway, in that time there have been HUGE events in which I’d like to focus on. The NHS reforms (naturally), Portugal bail-out (naturally again) and University Minister, David Willetts, on Feminism.

First off, all I have to say on the NHS reforms is, thank god! No one wants these reforms. The BMA opposes it, the Lib Dems oppose it, 60% of GPs oppose the reforms and none other than Lord Tebbit opposes the reforms. If your too right-wing for Lord Tebbit, you know your policies have huge issues. Ian Duncan-Smith (IDS) even admitted that waiting times were already rising due to real term cuts to the NHS. Lansley has been hung out to dry by Cameron, lets only hope his reforms can also, permanently.

Now, naturally with the announcement of the bail-out for Portugal, Gideon jumped on the austerity bandwagon to claim that the cuts were right to prevent a similar situation occurring here in the UK. But if you stop, think and compare us, Portugal and other nation-states that have been bailed out you’ll see that this isn’t the case. For one thing, it’s important to note that prior to the bail-out, Portugal had had two austerity measures and three rises in VAT. Similarly, Ireland had been praised by the IMF in 2008 for “courageous” action for its austerity measures in an attempt to deal with its deficit. This naturally says something more about the problems of austerity than the problems of deficit/debt. For another thing, to say that Britain’s economy is anyway similar to Portugal’s/Ireland’s/Greece’s is absolutely ludicrous. We for one have a far, far larger economy than that of those countries, we have far more time to pay back our debts and most plainly of all, we’re not in the Euro so we can devalue our currency raise and lower interest rates. So please Gideon, don’t jump on the scaremongering bandwagon.

Finally, probably the least well known of the issues I’m focusing on is David Willetts’ comments on Feminism. Now, if you’ve been living in a cave the last couple of weeks what he said was that feminism was the “single biggest factor” for the lack of social mobility in Britain, as women who would otherwise have been housewives had taken university places and well-paid jobs that could have gone to ambitious working-class men. Now this is wrong and completely degrading on so many levels. Don’t get me wrong, Labour really didn’t do enough to tackle social mobility while in government. But feminism is in no way the cause of the problem. The true problem is the lack of aspiration from schools and deprived regions of the country to want young people to aim higher and also the problems of money that entail that. These comments also leave a more distasteful message. It is the assumption that women are out there, taking men’s jobs. Willets’ idea that women’s primary place is in the domestic household represents nothing less than a subliminal form of sexism. This is only exacerbated when he went onto excuse his comments with “It is not that I am against feminism,”.

This hasn’t been a good couple of weeks for the coalition.

Max

Just a very quick note

Just a very quick break from my essay to indulge you with a little bit of information.

The BBC’s Stephanie Flanders has discovered that the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) is barred from testing alternative scenarios, so the government hopes no one will find out.

Is the Coalition scared of the OBR proving them wrong? From this it seems so…and now back to essay.

Oh and the best of luck for those going on the ‘March for the Alternative’ tomorrow in London! Do BULS proud!

Max

The deficit blame game

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not the biggest fan of the Head of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, but I do recognise he still know (at the very least) a fair bit about the economy. Now one of the reasons why there has been such little apathy or support for the cuts so far is that the Coalition has been always been able to simply say “Well we are just cleaning up the mess left by the previous Labour government.” which I can say if repeated as often as they do say, does make an impact and it does stick with you. But, that may well about to change.

Although he supports the Coalition’s current policies to cut the deficit (which I’ll disagree with, rightly so), he also over last weekend during the Tory’s spring conference in Wales stated that the real reason for the deficit was in fact not because of the last Labour government. Rather, like what we have been saying for the past two and a half years it was the fault of the banks and more stingingly of all that the action taken to address the financial crisis, in 2008 and 2009, “prevented a repetition of the Great Depression”.

Yes that’s right, the Governor of the Bank of England stated that 1. the deficit is not the fault of the last Labour government and 2. the economic stimulus was the right thing to do. If you’ve watched Question Time result over the last few weeks, the ‘deficit blame game’ is really not working.

Max

Stagflation?

Growth stalling, inflation rising and unemployment rising, for all the Tories comparison themselves and 1979 coming in “to clean up Labour’s mess”, it seems this government more reflects the 1970s than did Labour. Now, in BULS we’re wise enough to recognise that this ‘stagflation’ is not due to the cuts (as they are still yet to take fully effect yet) but rather the ending of Darling’s economic stimulus.

Up until the growth figures came out last month I personally very much doubted that the UK would actually slip into a full blown double-dip recession, but rather ‘bump along the bottom’. Since these figures have been produced, I fear there is a very good chance now. If this continues and even if worsens when the cuts bite (which I have a feeling they will do) Labour will have the sad duty of saying “don’t say we didn’t warn you” as throughout the election we campaigned to keep investment in the economy until 2011. But, I hope for the sake of the people of Britain, that day never comes.

Max

Beginning to see the light

Like most in BULS, I for one have lost a lot of respect for the Liberal Democrats for numerous reasons. But as of yesterday, some faith has been restored. Nothing short of 90 Liberal Democrat Councillors of which 18 are leaders of local authorities wrote into the Times criticising the Coalition of the pace of the cuts.

Lib Dem Communities Minister Andrew Stunell had the cheek to urge his party members not to “fall out” over “pointless debate”. A “pointless debate”! There is nothing “pointless” about the Governments austerity programme. You may believe it is the right course of action, but this is so far from “pointless”.

This also feeds into a wider reality of Coalition of hypocrisy, the creation of the “Big Society” (however much a nice idea it may be) amongst a deep austerity programme. This is most symbolised in the scrapping of many libraries up and down the country which are bastions of localism.

Today my faith in one section of the Coalition was (ever so) partially restored; the same can probably never be said for the other section.

Max

Granted it’s a slight improvement

Now here in BULS we are willing to give credit where credit is due, however slight it is. The Coalition has recently decided to raise the bank levy to £2.5 billion, up by £800 million. However, this is still not enough despite the improvement as the banks still face a tax cut of around a £1 billion when compared to the bankers bonus tax last year and that’s not even including the cut in corporation tax which means even with the bank levy the banks break even.

I’d also like to tackle the issue or argument that if you tax the banks too much they will move abroad. Well if you make it explicitly clear that this levy is just merely for the Parliament, even if the corporation tax cut doesn’t include the banks and the levy is higher, banks are not going to move abroad given they know it’s just for one Parliament, i.e. five years. So need to get into a big fuss.

Max

Double dip?

I’ve never studied economics before

Now, I’ve never really been one for thinking that the government’s austerity programme would actually throw the UK back into a double dip recession. What was always my belief, and the belief of many others is that the economy would merely ‘bump along the bottom’ and have only a bit of growth and then begin to take off a few years down the line. What has happened and very unfortunately is that growth in the final quarter of 2010 actually contracted by 0.5%. That’s right, the economy shrank by 0.5%.

Now unlike the Tories during the recession in 2008 and 2009 I accept there is more to this than merely blaming the government of the day. The global economy is still in a very fragile state (something we argued during the general election) and the severe weather during December will have played it’s part. But, this is where my sympathy falls short. One of the biggest contributor’s to the contraction was the construction industry, shrinking by 3.3%(!). And why is this you may ask? Well, of course one of the major reasons was the ‘Emergency Budget’ and the scrapping of the Building Schools for the Future.

It seems the Tory-led Coalition seems completely incapable of realising the links between the public and private sector. If you cancel contracts, it will hit the private sector. If you do little to tackle the slowly rising unemployment, then where will the demand for the private sector come from? And if you think this is the end of if, you’re in for a disappointment, as soon the true effects of the savage cuts of the Comprehensive Spending Review will begin the to bite the real economy.

Britain is still not fully in recession yet, as two quarters of contraction are needed for that. But, if a full recession comes to pass next April then the Coalition will have no option to change course and re-think it’s economic strategy. While we in BULS and Labour as a whole will have the sad duty of saying “We told you so.”. But let’s just hope that doesn’t happen.

Max

Labour now has the Balls

Chris Riddell 23 January 2011

Now, I’m not going to focus on Alan Johnson, Suzy has already dealt with that, but I just like to say he’ll be surely missed from the front-line politics.

Anyway, we move onto Johnson’s successor, Ed Balls. Now to many Tories, they will regard this as a late Christmas present. The well oiled Tory party machine has already been making well-directed attacks towards Gordon Brown’s former chief economic’s adviser and playing at his past which was so intertwined with the Blair-Brown feud. Yes, Balls was a major figure during the feuds, but as a wise Baboon once said “Oh yes, de past can hurt. But the way I see it you can either run from it, or learn from it.” (the wise Baboon being Rafiki from the Lion King……..BULS draws wisdom from many walks of life). Yes, Balls’ part in the feud was far from his finest hour and many of the economic policies did contribute to the financial crisis (will come back to the latter part later). But, this is a time for Balls in particular to shape his own image and reputation. As Shadow Chancellor, with his deep knowledge of economics, he will be able to establish at least a broad thinking idea of Labour’s alternative and most likely rip Gideon to shreds in the process (I particularly like the idea of the latter).

With growth beginning to slow, inflation and unemployment rising, there has been no better time to be an “attack dog”. But the Tory-led Coalition is quick point out the failures of economic policy Labour made. We did make great progress under ‘New’ Labour, but we also made grave mistakes. But, to counter the Tory-party machine, we do need strong responses in order as well as humility about our record. When Cameron (or indeed anyone) criticises Labour failing to regulate the banks, quote back Gideon and Cameron’s years of calling for further de-regulation. And when Cameron claims Labour’s spending caused the deficit, don’t forget to remind them that Conservative spending policies before the 2008 crash would have rigidly stuck to Labour’s. The Tory-lead Coalition’s deceit cannot last forever and hopefully, Ed Balls can dispel the rhetoric as soon as.

Max

Bankers bonuses

I’m not going to delve too much into the Coalition’s U-turn on restricting bankers bonuses (literally found in first paragraph of Coalition agreement) as I ironically have a conservatism essay to do. So I though I’d let this video explain that in fact, bonuses, of any kind (except for ones which people’s income depend upon) just don’t work. Much to my surprise as well.

Max

The King

There are many positions in society that require an independent stance on party political issues; the civil service, police constables, the Queen and yes the Head of the Bank of England. As you may be aware David Blanchflower, a leading economist and former member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee has called on King to resign following remarks released by Wikileaks where he expressed concerns about DC and Gideon’s ability and experience to run the economy prior to the election. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of King and independence that transcends both public support and an institutes actions and influence is necessary in the Bank of England. But passing remarks is in no way an infringement of this independence. King is perfectly entitled to his own private views as long as it does not impede or politicise his job.

However, one area I’m quite happy to criticise King is that of his own judgement. As late as Northern Rock, King would have rather the bank failed. And as late as last May, King was predicting the economy to grow by 3.5% in 2011, rather than the downgraded 2.1% published by the OBR a few days ago (although admittedly this might’ve been downgraded because the looming age of austerity).

Independent, yes (more or less), sound judgement, we have our doubts.

Max

Bumping along the bottom

Yesterday the Office for Budget Responsibility  published it’s new growth and unemployment forecasts. If you’re not aware (given the news is now non-existent on the BBC website), growth forecast for 2010 was raised and job losses were slashed (which we welcome, although for the latter we’re hearing numerous other figures so retain the right to stay sceptical). But, once again, growth expectations for 2011 and 2012 have been lowered and OBR added that the government had a “better than 50%” chance of meeting its mandate to wipe out the structural deficit – the gap between spending and taxes – by 2015-16.

So what are we seeing here? Well the growth figures for this year have been raised due to the action taken by the last government over a number of months, the coalition may claim that this is there doing, but as every economist knows (though I can’t say I’m one) there is always a lag effect between a governments decisions on economic policy and it eventually effecting the real economy. And what of 2011 and 2012? Well this is there own doing, as this is the second time the OBR has slashed its growth forecast due to the policies the Coalition is implementing. Now I don’t think we’re going to see a double-dip recession (though with the continuing economic climate I wouldn’t rule it out) but what we will probably see is Britiain “bumping along the bottom” (if that’s the correct saying). We hope not, but still fear it all the same.

Max

We’re warning you

Chris Riddell 24 Oct

Many of you will have heard about the 490,000 job losses in the public sector from the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). But what if that number is wrong? The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) has predicted that in fact things are about to get worse. From the spending cuts and the rise in VAT, they predict around 1.6 million job losses in the next five years from the public and private sector (900,000-Private, 750,000-Public).

Yes, that’s right, 1.6 million! Of course it’s not without it’s flaws, Chief Economist at the CIPD, John Philpot, predicted unemployment would reach 3 million, thankfully the action Labour took in it’s last months in office has so far prevented this. But, 1.6 million!! This without doubt destroys any idea that the private sector will magically be able to create around 2 million jobs and is clear indicator to Cleggy, DC and Gideon, that you should not have your plans firmly nailed to the mast.

Max

Entirely welcome

Today was published the latest growth figures of the third quarter between July and September. 0.8% which was twice as high as the expected 0.4%. Now, don’t forget though, this is still primarily due to the last Labour government, the Coalition had been in power for four months and this is before the CSR. I’m going to say that the final quarter will mainly be the cause of the last government as it will take a while for the CSR to effect, so anything that happens in 2011 will be the credit or failure of the Coalition as the CSR begins to bite. However, most economists are still arguing that the economy is still fragile, so don’t place your bets yet, and it is still warning for the governments deficit reduction plan, don’t be nailed to the mast.

Max

Record breaking

Last June, around 48 hours after the announcement of the ‘emergency’ budget the well respected Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) slammed the Coalition’s claim that the budget was ‘progressive’. It seems that the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) has smashed all records to be proved false; this time it only took the IFS around about 24 hours to slam the claim, again, that the CSR was regressive.

Many Tories last time around were quick to argue that the IFS is in the pocket of Labour, which is hugely untrue given they were highly critical of Labour’s policies on Child Poverty. And if anything shows how regressive the nature of the CSR is you look no further than Carl Emmerson, acting Director of the IFS: “Our analysis continues to show that, with the notable exception of the richest 2%, the tax and benefit components of the fiscal consolidation are, overall, being implemented in a regressive way.”.

There will come a point in the Coalition’s future where they will no longer able to say “this isn’t our mess” and “there’s no other option” because no, there is always an alternative and at some point in the not too distant future the public will realise that these are not “Labour’s cuts” but rather those chosen by the Coalition at a rate and speed they chose.

Finally, the only slim claim that the reason for the Coalition’s economic policies being fair was also destroyed yesterday. Both DC and Cleggy have argued that it’s not fair to leave the debt onto the next generation. Apart from raising tuition fees to £7k a year it is now revealed that despite the Pupil Premium for the poorest of pupils at primary and secondary schools, 43% of pupils in less deprived parts of the country would be hit by 5% cuts or more. That seems to me like that the debt is being shifted onto the next generation.

Max

Divided we fall

I admire Laurie Penny. I really do. But her latest blog on the New Statesman is counterproductive. Labour are NOT taking this lying down. Labour is the natural home for those who have been left out in the cold by the cuts, but more generally everyone who hasn’t been taken in by the talk of necessity must unite to oppose the spending review.

As the official opposition ours must be the loudest and most credible voice, the most potent ideas in creating alternatives, the bravest actions defending those who need to be defended. We must work together with the Lib Dem rebels when they emerge, with the unions, with the sensible media, the organisations facing decimation and the local councils. Because the Tories’ real mantra is not “we’re all in this together” but “Divide and Rule”.

It’s a clever strategy because stricken groups have started thinking “it’s us or them”. So the owners of art galleries might argue their case at the expense of theatres or museums. The NHS can campaign as being more essential that higher education. Those struggling to get onto the housing ladder can blame all those “benefit cheats” they’ve been hearing about.

Meanwhile we’ve been “benefitting” from a little Lib-Dem devolution in which local councils can decide exactly which services to cut from their budgets. This may lead to competition, but is more likely to lead to poor management and bankruptcy.

From division by group in society to division by area of the country the coalition has got us covered. But the protests are just beginning…

Suzy

The end is nigh

17.10.2010 Chris Riddell cartoonSo here it is, after over 5 months of build up, the spending review is here, of course we don’t know everything that Gideon is going to cut yet (and I’m not going to cover the spending review fully, Kieran said he would do that). Average spending cuts of 25% to most Whitehall departments (with some suffering 40%) over 4 years and around 500,000 job losses over that same period (which the private sector will magically pick up after).

The Coalition has for a long period constantly lambasted the public that the scale and speed of these cuts “is necessary and unavoidable” and yes admittedly we’ve been stuck in a leadership election but it’s now our job to say, “No! There is always an alternative”. The Coalition has often used the comparison between a household budget and that of the structural deficit, and in this case we should do the same (bear with me), as when a family goes into debt, yes they need to balance the books but you never see a house do everything they can to reduce the debt as quickly as they possibly can by selling the furniture, the kitchen, the TV, etc until you leave the house completely bare.

Even though I sincerely doubt it, I do hope the Lib Dems will have softened the blow Gideon is going to make, but again, hugely unlikely.

Max

We are NOT all in this together…..and even they know it

“We are all in this together” is the famous six worded sentence announced by George Osborne at the time of the emergency budget. However, this declaration has taken yet another blow. Despite the budget already being proved to hit women, ethnic minorities and the north disproportionally more, it is now revealed that the Scotland’s, Wales’ and Northern Ireland’s First, Deputy and Finance Ministers also concur that we are indeed not all in this together. An extract from the joint statement can be found here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11493001 and so proves that no, it isn’t Labour in denial over the figures, in this declaration we have the DUP, Sinn Fein, SNP and Plaid Cymru as well. And no, they aren’t doing this to gain popularity with a “tussle” with the government in London; they are doing this because what the Coalition is doing in regards to the structural deficit is in fact not in the national interest. But rather a backdrop for ideological dogma, as placed extremely well by the columnist Polly Toynbee, “Blue ideology comes well disguised at a time when all cuts, however extreme, can be disguised as necessity.”.

This is also reflected recently on the daily politics show recently where it was revealed that since David Cameron became leader in 2005 Tory party membership has dropped by a third(!) in the space of five years, yes Labour’s dropped throughout 13 years in government, but this is something quite phenomenal and while in opposition too. This is in direct contrast to Labour membership which has shot up since May 6th with what I’m proud to announce, 65 new fully fledged members of BULS at the fresher’s stall and a further 150 added to the emailing list.

Max

Not so top of the mornin’

As you may be aware the IMF recently endorsed the Coalition’s deficit reduction plans, much to the glee of those in BUC”F”, etc. However, similar compliments were said to that of the Irish Government’s austerity actions two years ago. Now no one is saying that the UK and Irish economies and their features are the same (unlike the DC, Gideon and Cleggy who hopelessly used Greece and Canada as examples to justify their austerity measures in a downright scare campaign), but it does give a tell tale sign of what MAY happen if you slash spending, force thousands more to the unemployed register and consequently lowers tax receipts.

Also, if you were watching tonight’s Question Time, the IMF’s credibility was absolutely decimated. Given it was pointed out by members of the audience and the panel that they are totally inept at understanding the social impacts of any real policy they support and how little progress they’ve made with child poverty in Africa.

Max

Need we say more…

Chancellor George Osborne speaking at Bloomberg headquarters 17/08/2010

Boy George (Osborne), DC (Cameron) and Cleggy have all ardently claimed that the recent “emergency budget” was hardwired into being a “progressive” budget and that the poor would be shielded from the upcoming years of austerity and that in the words of DC, “we are all in this together”…….what he forgot to add was “…unless you’re rich but you’re particularly in if you’re poor”.

A recent report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), Britain’s leading independent tax organisations completely destroyed the coalitions claims that the budget is “progressive” but rather describing it as “clearly regressive as, on average, they hit the poorest households more than those in the upper middle of the income distribution in cash, let alone percentage, terms.”. Yes, you read the quote correctly; it hits the poorest harder in cash never mind percentage terms!

The IFS also said the poorest 10% of families would lose over 5% of their income as a result of the budget compared with a loss of less than 1% for non-pensioner households without children in the richest 10% of households. It added that the budget contrasted with the “progressive” plans for 2010-14 inherited from Labour, under which the richest 10% of households bore the brunt of the cuts.

Leaving aside whether it is a right or wrong descision to attempt to remove the structural deficit within 5 years, I can assure you know that the coalition will turn round and you use one of the oldest tricks in the books, blame the predecessors. Well let me say, don’t you even dare, don’t even dare, this is now totally the coalition’s doing. This is what happens when you have severe changes to housing benefit, disability allowances, tax credits and a deficit reduction plan that is totally out of balance in terms of cuts to taxation.

We all knew the Tories where bulling when DC stated that “we are all in this together” and that the Lib Dems had sold themselves out on economic policy, but now we have conclusive proof from a well respected independent body, all we can say now is, need we say more…

Max

Ideological dogma, and nothing less

19.07.2010: Martin Rowson on the Tory spending cut sideshow

David Cameron (DC) was today in none other than good ol’ Brum at a “PM direct” session (where I think BCF where present). Reading in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/03/david-cameron-public-sector-cuts-permanent (sorry Sean but I saw it on Facebook) recently DC pledged at the session that once the deficit has been dealt with, funding will not be restored to public services.

Now to put this in perspective, DC (and recently Cleggy) have been arguing that the savage cuts they are going to make to the public sector are apparently “necessary”, leaving aside whether the ideas are right or wrong it is this key argument of “necessity” that has prevailed through. What we have seen here from DC is that no, the rate in which they are cutting is not in fact necessary but rather a pre-text for petty ideological goals and dogma.Essentially, what DC is saying is that once the deficit has been dealt with, the state will not return to help those in need, it won’t increase investment in the primary areas of the NHS, Police (which protect the health, safety and wellbeing of people) and Education which are three most important tiers of the public sector and social benefits to those truly in need them in any future troubles will also be stuck at their austerity levels.DC states that “How can we do things differently and better to give value for money?” which is understandably fair enough, if you’re going to spend money, it has to be at the best value for money, but there is a distinct line between “value for money” and downright underinvestment. I hope DC will have the humility one day to feel remorse for the pain he is about to cause for mere ideological dogma.

Max

The last gift of the Labour government

In the second quarter of 2010 the UK economy grew by 1.1%. This is clearly the result of the actions taken by the Labour government in their final months and it would’ve been higher were it not for the Volcanic Ash cloud.

However, to say “oh, economy already back on track, it’s clearly secure to swiftly slash the deficit” is wrong! The Chancellor, Boy George, summed it up himself “Today’s figures show the private sector contributing all but 0.1% of the growth in the second quarter,” which consequently means that if you are going to “cut” your way out of the deficit that remaining 1% is going to disappear rather quickly. Add this to the fact that most economists are saying that the recovery is not secured meaning that to savage public services rather than a carefully planned programmed to halve the deficit in 4 years would plunge the country back into deep recession and this time, there will be no plan B.

Max

Poor poor Vince

Chris Riddell on Nick Clegg

I was watching question time last Thursday (yes I know this might be a bit late) and was pained to see none other than Vince Cable (the only Liberal Democrat I have a great degree of respect for) being effectively made to eat his own words from the general election campaign. It was quite clear that he hated every moment on the show and half of what he said he obviously did not personally believe.

Now the coalition was the best option open for the Liberal Democrats after the election, better to influence events on the inside than shout from the sidelines. But, one of their major failings is that they have for the time being, failed to give the coalition a distinct progressive edge. They failed to shift the burden of the Tory cuts onto the rich but rather onto the poor as argued by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fuk%2F2010%2Fjun%2F23%2Fbudget-welfare-poor-ifs-report&h=94854p2-JAX6pOiaLB95ROte4HA and humiliatingly had to u-turn over a rise of VAT which topped the Tories era of austerity.

These failures are being noticed by the electorate, with support in a YouGov poll on the 5th May at a high 28%, while on the 25th June it was shown to have been decimated to a mere 16%. Another poll showed that 48% of people who voted for the Liberal Democrats at the last election are less inclined to do so again, primarily over the rise in VAT.

The future doesn’t look bright for Vince and his fellow Liberal Democrats, if the coalition does succeed the Tories will gain credit, being the dominant partner and if it fails, the Liberal Democrats will never again be able to regard themselves as a progressive force.

Max

The axe falls

Chris Riddell 20.06.10

Today saw George Osborne’s first ever budget as Chancellor in which Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats showed how much they had sold themselves out. Despite accusing Cameron of threatening to raise VAT with a re-run of the famous Tory poster of “Labour’s tax bombshell” have now agreed with their coalition partners to indeed raise VAT to 20% in which the house was in uproar! The thing with the VAT is that it is generic, it targets no specific group, so in other words, rather than taxing higher earners, it is those on middle to lower incomes who will suffer from this “tax bombshell”. Here is a rundown of the main aspects of the budget:

  1. VAT will rise from 17.5% to 20% from January 4, 2011 (already touched upon but still rather ironic)
  2. Councils which propose low council tax increases will be offered extra funds to allow them to freeze the tax for one year from April 2011 (would be great if we had the money)
  3. Capital Gains Tax remains at 18% for low and middle-income savers but from midnight, higher rate taxpayers will pay 28% (now that I can agree with)
  4. The capital gains tax “entrepreneurs relief” rate of 10% on the first £2m of gains will be extended to the first £5m (frankly if they earn that much they deserve a level of taxation, especially now)
  5. No raise to alcohol, cigarettes and fuel (pity it wasn’t raised on cigarettes)
  6. Low income families will get more Child Tax Credit – the amount per child will rise by £150 above the rate of inflation next year (again, I can agree with that)
  7. Sure Start maternity grant will be restricted to the first child (kind of stupid, better have it the other way around as you will have more mouths to feed)
  8. Corporation Tax will be cut next year to 27%, and by 1% annually for the next three years, until it reaches 24% (should be raised for bigger businesses in my eyes)
  9. Average real terms budget cuts of 25% over four years – except for health and international aid (there goes my local bobby and half of the state sector teachers
  10. Personal income tax allowance to be increased by £1,000 in April to £7,475 – worth £170 a year to basic rate taxpayers (the sole thing in this budget I would commend, obviously the Lib Dems managed to get A concession out).

VAT rise which will hit the poorest hardest and corporation tax cuts…….in the words of J. K. Rowling, “I’ve never voted Tory before, and they keep reminding me why.”

Max

‘Efficiency’ savings

Two little things pointed out today on the BBC I found rather funny on the ensuing national insurance rise/Tory ‘efficiency’ savings.

  1. Alistair Darling today pointed out that this morning Dave admitted that his proposed ‘efficiency’ savings would not be enough to fund all his proposed tax breaks but then declined to say where the money would come from to fund the rest.
  2. And on BBC news amongst Tories promising to extend a stopping of benefits if an individual is caught committing benefit fraud 3 times to (I think) 3 years; they failed to point out that not a single person last year got caught committing benefit fraud 3 times.

A little on the side, tax breaks for married couples, while still lacking full detail (how original) the Tories will be going ahead with it. I’m sorry but you could really spend that money elsewhere on far better causes like rejuvenating deprived areas, creating a more environmentally friendly economy or simply paying off the deficit.

Max

Just a thought…

With the campaign well under way, many have begun to question Dave’s consistency on cutting the deficit. Labour wishes to cut the deficit in half in 4 years, the Tories say they will do it faster. However, there is one little nagging issue for the Tories as they have made similar pledges to cut certain taxes, namely:

  • Most of the national insurance rise
  • Inheritance tax for the 3000 richest families
  • Marriage tax breaks
  • Council tax

Now frankly during decent economic periods these would actually be realistic arguments and policies, but when the UK has only just emerged from recession (I read somewhere today that the UK has in fact avoided a double-dip recession with growth at 0.4% for the first quarter) and a substantial budget deficit. So where will this money come from to fund millionaires? Yep, you guessed it, front line services with Boy George (Osborne) saying that it would cost 44,000 public sector jobs. There has been an apparent efficiency savings but even IF they managed to cough up the aforementioned amount of money it still would not be enough to cover all the tax cuts.

Max

Lest we forget 2

2. Tory political oppurtunism at the worst possible time

Chris Riddell: The broken society ...

The second blog in this series I was going to save for last but as it is the biggest issue I personally have against Dave and the Tories, I thought it’d be better to get it out of the way now. The cartoon above is taken from my favourite political cartoonist, Chris Riddell, from the Observer. This was done just after the Tories 2008 party conference and virtually the start of the financial crisis were the banks were on the edge of collapse.

If you drift your memories back to Labour’s 2008 conference Gordon Brown famously stated in the midst of the banking crisis, “this is no time for a novice”. This was followed by Dave at the Tory party conference who pledged Brown a degree of support to bail-out the banks. 10 days later Dave changed tack in PMQs and attacking Brown for the likes of reckless spending and so ending the temporary political truce. Evidently Dave’s made a big issue out of this since which, but what about those 10 days?

Brown was jetting around Europe organising an international effort during those 10 days and obviously he got a tad of media coverage, which was inevitable given the circumstances.

So it can be seen that Dave did realise that this at the time was the right course of action but once again his need to appear different to the Government (and somehow a better option) prevailed. But, this is something we cannot allow the public to forget or to forgive!

Max

Darling’s D-Day.


Alistair Darling outside No. 11 Downing Street.

I’d like to thank Max for his hard work, and look forward to his future posts in ‘Ramsay’s F Word’.

Now the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, has delivered the 2010 budget which could significantly affect the result of 6th May and indeed the future of our nation.

Briefly the key points to reduce the deficit, and help the British people:

  • The deficit is not as severe as 2009/10 predictions state- £167 billion rather than £178 billion
  • Fuel duty to rise by a penny in April followed by a further 1p rise in October.
  • Stamp duty threshold for first-time buyers in increased- this will greatly ease the strain for those starting out on the property ladder!
  • Stamp duty will be increased by 5% for properties over £1 million from April, a prospect which will most probably anger Conservatives.
  • No-one under 24 will need to be unemployed for longer than six months without being offered jobs or training.
  • Perhaps the most disappointing move by Mr Darling is the increase of 10% on the price of cider which could equate to an extra 27p for a pint. Not exactly ideal for the average student.
  • Annual investment allowance for small businesses doubled to £100,000, which means greater help for struggling businesses who provide a strong foundation to our economy. There is also a £2.5 billion package to stimulate new innovation.
  • Duty on beer, wine and spirits will increase as planned from midnight on Sunday. Alcohol duties will also increase by 2% above inflation for two further years from 2013.
  • Tobacco duty will rise today by 1% above inflation and then increase by 2% in real terms each year until 2014.
  • Business rates will be cut for one year from October which brings a tax reduction for over 500,000 small businesses.
  • The government has also suggested that there will be 20,000 new places for decent university subjects.

The blueprint for a successful recovery through sensible and pragmatic initiatives has been proposed by Alistair Darling. It’s now our job to campaign not just for the preservation of the current and effective administration, but also fight for the future of our country. With ‘Airbrushed’ Dave and his sidekick at the helm, we could descend into a nation of bitter discontent.

Kieran

Better than expected

 It was revealed that in February that inflation fell 0.5% to 3%. Now this is actually a greater fall than expected which I think is something of a recurring theme throughout the recovery, it is always greater than predicted. Unemployment at the start of the recession was predicted to hit 3 million within a few months, but it is still under 2.5 million. Thankfully the action that was taken did lessen the impact of the recession that did hit all countries, as this is the only thing a government could do in the midst of a global recession rather than, oh, let it run its course.

Oh and not to mention http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8574018.stm borrowing in February was less than expected.

Max

Unemployment falls, again!

Job centre

In the last quarter of 2009, unemployment fell by 33,000 to 2.45 million, this is the 2nd or 3rd quarter it has done this (may be totally wrong on that point) and the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance fell by 32,300 to 1.59 million in February. Now this in itself is quite an achievement, in past recessions unemployment had always risen still after the economy has re-entered growth. Back in the autumn of 2008, during the dire banking crisis and the fiscal stimulus that followed an extra £5 billion was pumped into job centre plus, this has then resulted in 10,000 new jobs being found per DAY! Of course, one particular party opposed such measures to help ease the recession, no guesses who.

Obviously, we are not out of the woods yet, there is still a bit of pain left to endure, but never again will we endure unemployment at a staggering 3 million.

Max

Liam Byrne delivers the figures!

In an interview with Andrew Neil, Liam Byrne MP (Chief Secretary to the Treasury) set the record straight in announcing that the government needed to half the deficit by £82 billion, and stated that the £19 billion that is currently accrued by taxes, is sufficient enough and that no further increase in tax is necessary. He spelled out that the remainder of the deficit will be cut through economic growth (£25 billion) and cuts in public spending. With a cool head he did not shy away from telling how tough it might be, and made a media-hyped sour pill a somewhat sweeter one to swallow indeed!

Liam Byrne on Thursday’s Daily Politics:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/03/byrne_set_tongues_wagging.html

Kieran

The twisting of the evidence

Like most people at BULS, up until the UK emerged from recession I was beginning to find it rather boring of Dave and Osborne attacking the government for lagging behind in recession while the “world left us behind”. But, this has been showed by recent figures that this well is not going to happen just yet.  Europe’s biggest economy, Germany failed to grow at all in the last quarter of 2009 while other countries such as Spain, Italy (who’s also apart of the G20) and Greece are still in recession. This shows that no Dave, we weren’t being left behind, and drastic cuts will plunge UK and then potentially parts of Europe back into recession also.

Mini-rant over

Max