 |
|
Challenging conventional wisdom about the elections
Following last week’s elections, the conventional wisdom can be summarised roughly as follows. The cause of electoral reform is dead; Labour did well in Northern England but poorly in Southern England; Labour’s defeat in Scotland was unprecedented and historic; the Lib Dems got hammered by Labour; and Labour needs to move to attract ‘centrist’ voters and fight the Tories for the ‘centre ground’. I think the lessons of the elections give cause to challenge all of these. continue reading… »
Libdems could have no women MPs at election
A General Election in 2011 is no longer unthinkable, argues Jackie Ashley in The Guardian. Few LibDems would relish the prospect.
But how many realise that, if such an election took place, they would face a serious risk of ending up with no women MPs at all?
continue reading… »
Why is Nick Clegg attacked for doing the right thing on social mobility?
contribution by George Potter
Nick Clegg is being called a hypocrite for daring to want to improve social mobility when he benefited from unfair advantages himself in the past.
The principle people behind this attack are the Labour leadership and accusation of hypocrisy has been taken up by the media – both left and right wing. Labour should ask themselves why it is that, while Libcon linked to an article attacking Nick Clegg in the Independent, the Daily Mail’s front page is calling Nick Clegg a hypocrite.
continue reading… »
The Libdems may have been more influential in opposition
There is a new website called ‘What the hell have the Lib Dems done?’ which aims to showcase all their successes since they entered government. It’s well worth a read, though from a quick scan there is a fair bit of barrel-scraping, and examples of the “we promised to do x, and we have achieved this by setting up a committee to look at it” sort.
So here’s an interesting question. Has the number of policies featured in Lib Dem election manifestos which actually got implemented by government increased or decreased since May 2010?
continue reading… »
Ten ways to pressure on the Coalition and defeat it
The hundreds of thousands of people who marched through London on 26th March were a powerful testimony to the strength of opposition to the coalition government’s cuts agenda.
Afterwards, the differences between those involved in parliamentary politics and those involved in direct action could lead both groups to think ‘these are the times that try men’s souls.’ Such tensions are inevitable. The important lesson I think should be drawn is that this must not distract from the pressure on the coalition.
Here are ten ways to put pressure on the Coalition.
continue reading… »
Did Labour councils deliberately cut frontline services?
Guest post by George W. Potter
I’ve been holding up the example of Lib Dem run Sheffield council vs Labour run Manchester council recently as an example of how councils aren’t forced to cut public services – they choose to. I’ve been challenged on this comparison so this is an article where I’m going to compare as much as possible between the two councils to try and settle the issue once and for all. continue reading… »
Can the Lib Dems save the NHS?
Lib Dem conference recently passed a motion which urged substantial changes to the government’s plans for the NHS. I think it is fair to say that there are a relatively small number of people who think that this will lead to any substantial changes, given the record of the Lib Dems in government to date. But it seems to me that the chance of saving the NHS from the Tories is a massive political opportunity for the Lib Dems. continue reading… »
Govt plans council tax rises for poorest
It’s popcorn time for fans of joined up government as Eric Pickles and Iain Duncan Smith’s departments go to war over council tax benefit. Duncan Smith is attempting to simplify the benefits system, while Pickles is planning to let every local council set its own rules on who gets council tax benefit, thus making the system more complicated and increasing the risk that people are better off on benefits than working. As usual, if Pickles wins, the losers are likely to be people on low incomes. continue reading… »
Two reasons why Libdems might not benefit from AV
For everyone, from the BBC and Peter Kellner to Nick Clegg himself, there are assumptions that LibDems will benefit from the referendum in May.
And after all, haven’t the LibDems in the past suffered a good deal from the ‘wasted vote’ argument, which AV would put an end to?
But there are two good reasons why this might not happen.
continue reading… »
Most Libdems have also started to shift against the cuts
The Independent on Sunday/Sunday Mirror ComRes polling yesterday brought bad news for the Coalition, as John Rentoul sets out, with opinion shifting against the government on every front.
The long lost “fair cuts” argument haemhorrages further. Trailing by 28-57% on whether the government is cutting too severely and too fast suggests the these ‘cuts are necessary’ case is in increasing trouble too.
continue reading… »
The cowardly fudge behind the rhetoric of Control Orders
I was at the Nick Clegg speech earlier today. He took aim at Labour’s pretty poor record on civil liberties, suggesting that the previous governments were more systematic and less casual than prominent ex-Ministers would have us believe.
Although there were some fine words on Libel Reform and some interesting proposals on Freedom of Information, most of the discussion in the speech itself, and in questions afterwards, was on control orders and curfews.
continue reading… »
Topple the government? Sorry Vince, that’s the SWP’s job
Vince Cable was branded a ‘Marxist’ after taking a tokenistic pop at the City in his last Lib Dem conference speech, and it seems this entirely unwarranted praise has gone to his head. Now he thinks he can bring the government down.
No Winter Palaces will require storming in this instance, though. It will be enough for the business secretary to stomp out of the cabinet in a hissy fit and bingo, the coalition will collapse, he told undercover Torygraph reporters, who taped the comments. He might soon find that, as the saying goes, no-one is indispensible.
I know how let down Libdems must feel
contribution by Cllr Bob Piper
Ed Miliband’s appeal for those Liberal Democrats dismayed by the coalition with the Conservatives may attract some waverers, but I doubt it will lead to the complete demise of the Lib Dems that some people are predicting.
Personally I have a sympathy with those on the radical wing of the Lib Dems who feel betrayed by Clegg, Alexander and co. They will have spent years listening to their leaders in opposition decrying “the two main parties” and promising nirvana if only they were in power.
continue reading… »
Why I’m proposing a motion of no-confidence in Nick Clegg at conference
contribution by George W Potter
Following the vote in the House of Commons yesterday, I, as a Lib Dem feel betrayed. I accept that the proposals are marginally better than the current system and that compromise is necessary in a coalition.
Indeed, I continue, in general, to actively support the coalition. But our MPs signed pledges that they would vote against any increase in fees – this wasn’t a negotiable manifesto promise but a cast iron guarantee to the electorate.
continue reading… »
Nick Clegg is transforming into an arrogant Tony Blair
Nick Clegg appears to be descending into a world of fantasy and illusion.
Last week he delivered a seriously confused lecture on how raising university fees and slashing higher education budgets – as well as abolishing the Education Maintenance Allowance – will boost social mobility.
He also had the audacity to suggest that opponents to the Browne review haven’t understood it, because if they did they’d know supporting Browne’s proposals is unquestionably right.
continue reading… »
Why Nick Clegg offers a recycled vision of society
contribution by Reuben
Last night Nick Clegg gave the annual Hugo Young lecture at the Guardian offices, and in doing so set out his vision of a just society.
In his speech – he sought to present the Liberal Democrats as the “new progressives”, in contrast to the “old progressives” of Labour and the left.
His starting point, that statism does necessarily equate to social progress, is something with which I would agree.
continue reading… »
Is Nick Clegg ditching his own principles on inequality?
Nick Clegg’s article in today’s Guardian is an important moment in the coalition government’s abandonment of the goal of reducing inequality.
The article addresses other important issues – party politics, the scope for progressive governments in an age of austerity – but I want to concentrate on what he says about inequality.
continue reading… »
Should Libdems propose a ‘two-tier manifesto’ at elections?
All this chat about how the Libdems have broken their manifesto promises leaves me a little cold. Or rather, in the modern parlance, “a bit meh”.
I think my failure to become outraged or agitated stems from a sense that the Liberal Democrats have fallen into a semantic trap. ‘Manifesto commitments’ are things that you promise to enact when you have Power to do so in Government.
But the situation that the Lib Dems find themselves in does not seem to fulfill the sufficient and neccessary conditions to merit such a description.
continue reading… »
Why are Libdems so calm in the face of electoral meltdown?
This was originally written for the Guardian. Am cross-posting it here too.
I don’t want to go all Margaret Thatcher on you, but it seems the Liberal Democrats will soon cease to be; they will expire. They will ring down the curtain and join the choir invisible.
I may be exaggerating, but only slightly.
On Thursday morning, polling company YouGov had Lib Dem support at single figures (9%) for the first time since 1997. It’s at 11% today (both within the polling margin of error) but the trend since May’s election has been steadily downwards.
If Labour or the Conservatives had shed half their support in a manner of months, people would be at panic stations.
continue reading… »
How welfare cuts hit low paid workers
In 2008, David Cameron declared that the abolition of the 10p tax rate for low paid workers was “punishing the low paid”. Vince Cable called for “fully costed proposals on how to make those on low incomes better off” and Nick Clegg said that “this was a matter of principles – remember them?”
They were right to do so. So how have they been putting these fine words into action since they took power in May?
The abolition of the 10p tax rate left some low paid workers worse off by up to £4.46 per week. Households with two adults, each earning less than £18,000 per year, were, therefore, hit by up to £8.92 per week – a substantial sum for people in low paid work at a time when the cost of living was rising, as Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg pointed out.
So let’s use that as an uncontentious baseline measure for measuring the impact of policies on low income workers. Everyone now agrees that the abolition of the 10p tax rate was a shameful attack on the working poor. Instead of the overheated political rhetoric about social cleansing, or competing graphs from government departments and research institutes, let’s just compare any recent policies which the government has announced, and compare them in magnitude to the impact of abolishing the 10p tax rate.
In the Comprehensive Spending Review, George Osborne announced that the percentage of childcare costs covered by tax credits would be reduced from 80% to 70%. A technical sounding change, which a casual listener might presume would have minimal impact.
This will cost a low paid worker with two children up to £30 per week, or rather more than three times as much as the maximum impact of the abolition of the 10p tax rate.
Osborne also announced that after one year, people would lose their entitlement to contributions- based Employment and Support Allowance. Probably fewer than 1 in 100 people know what contributions-based Employment and Support Allowance is. How bad could that be?
It means that a family where one adult is in low paid work and the other is currently receiving Employment and Support Allowance could lose up to £91.40 per week, or rather more than ten times as much as the maximum impact of the abolition of the 10p tax rate. Even if they are then able to claim Jobseekers’ Allowance instead, they will lose more than £30 per week.
What of housing benefit? Inside Housing magazine calculates that 936,960 of the 939,220 local housing allowance claimants will lose out by an average of £12 per week – rising to £22 per week in London. The average loss from technical sounding things like “setting rents based on the 30th percentile of private sector rents rather than the median” is more than one and a half times the maximum amount which the abolition of the 10p tax rate cost any family. That’s the average – some low paid workers will lose far more.
*
That’s just the initial impact (it is possible to calculate the effect of other cuts using the same measure). It doesn’t consider what happens to the low paid lone parent who has to try to find an extra £30 per week to pay for childcare, and is forced to quit her job as a result. It doesn’t consider the health impacts where one person is trying to hold down a low paid full time job and care for their sick partner, when they suddenly have to manage with £90 per week less. Or someone who has to find £12 a week or more in extra rent every week out of the wages of their minimum wage job, and who ends up getting into debt and getting evicted.
But even if you just consider those policies in cash terms, without making any further assumptions, then it shows that the government has already, within its first six months in office, announced three separate policies, each of which hit low income workers far harder than the abolition of the 10p tax rate.
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed.
» Does the law see ‘rape as rape’?
» How Lord Ashcroft hopes to deliver a ‘Conservative majority’ for 2015
» Why today’s inflation figures spell disaster for Osborne
» Will the Foreign Aid commitment be another Cameron u-turn?
» Help us push the Living Wage to stop the widening pay gap
» Assange, Strauss-Kahn: don’t rush to judgement
» Government’s own report finds the Future Jobs Fund, which they cut, was very effective
» Will Cameron be able to avert the NHS car-crash?
» Why protesters are now more likely to be defined as “terrorists”
» Why is the govt trying to block an independent credit ratings agency?
» Thatcherism is dead (or why we need higher wages)
|
16 Comments 31 Comments 10 Comments 20 Comments 2 Comments 15 Comments 23 Comments 23 Comments 44 Comments 67 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » Sunny Hundal posted on No 10 u-turns on rape sentencing plans » Chaise Guevara posted on Thousands to march for NHS today » Chaise Guevara posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » cim posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » cim posted on Assange, Strauss-Kahn: don't rush to judgement » George W. Potter posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » George W. Potter posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » George W. Potter posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » sean4thedefence posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » Liberal Conspiracy posted on Why is the UK failing Bahrain's people? » Stuart posted on Nearly a million union members threaten strike » AmandaSmith_nz posted on Does the law see 'rape as rape'? » Mark Manning posted on Nearly a million union members threaten strike » Jeff posted on Nearly a million union members threaten strike » Sunny Hundal posted on Nearly a million union members threaten strike |
