The people have chosen. They have picked 15 ideas to improve Britain and to close the progressive deficit. These are discussed in the latest issue of Progress.
But when some progressive policies are lifted up, others fall down onto the threshing floor of history. The Progress team has followed the ideas in our progressive deficit survey for a long time. Since appearing first in the magazine, they have been discussed up and down the country at Progress events and kicked around the office at lunchtimes. So we have picked one fallen idea from each category for rescue. There are some ideas we’ve simply become attached to. Too attached to let them go quietly into that good night.
Set up an independent commission on child poverty to track progress on its elimination and advise additional measures
The government’s greatest moral task is the removal of children from poverty and want. Public cynicism and uninterest from the press threaten both the recognition of progress so far and the fulfilment of the ultimate aim. What is needed on child poverty is the kind of progressive consensus between public and politicians that Gordon Brown has described around the Millennium Development Goals. There, campaigning organisations, press and politicians united around an aim. A commission on child poverty would add the transparency and trust needed to establish Labour’s greatest aim in the minds of people outside the party.
Prince Charles famously writes to ministers opining on their briefs. If he carries on the habit when king, Britain will be jackknifed into a huge constitutional crisis. Since ministers are officially appointed by the monarch, on what basis can they refuse to follow his instructions? Also, if royals are ambassadors for British trade or culture, what percentage of a trip do we expect them to be working before the cost is met by the public? These are the sort of issues that would be resolved by a job description.
A job description is not a club to beat the royals with. It is an admission from the left that it is unlikely we will get rid of the hereditary part of our constitution anytime soon. In return, monarchists should embrace the fact that the head of state and their family have to perform and be seen to perform, a useful role, and that they must be fenced off from the business of democratic government.
Allow referenda on the creation of neighourhood councils to help tackle ‘crime and grime’ issues, like anti-social behaviour and street cleaning
As the Labour party has so clearly acknowledged, behaviour and disorder are at the heart of the electorate’s concerns. It seems likely that a third-term government would add to the new powers available to combat intimidation on the streets. It is vital, of course, that Labour moves decisively to occupy that ground. Any party that fails to address people’s sense of security is not wholly electable.
However, what is the long-term solution to people’s sense that their streets don’t belong to them? It is a discussion between those who together own the public realm, the teenagers, the pensioners, the parents and the police. Government risks acting as a go-between for a conversation that must ultimately happen between citizens themselves. Local democracy and representation must mediate the competing demands made upon the public realm by all members of the community.
There is a lot of cant around the transfer of assets between generations. Of course it is right that people should be allowed to leave money to their children, especially if the wish to do so is one of their motivations to earn it in the first place. But to read some of the coverage in the media of inheritance tax you might think that the taxman has become a grave robber, and is snatching every keepsake from grieving relatives.
In fact, inheritance tax kicks in on the part of an estate over £263,000 at a rate of 40 per cent. For example, if you were the sole beneficiary of an estate worth half a million, you’d lose £94,000 to the Exchequer, which is either the taxman, or schools and hospitals, depending on your politics. However, inheritance tax is under attack from the Tories. They are following the example of George W Bush, who renamed it the ‘death tax’ and is looking to remove it entirely. They recognise that powerful wish of a parent to pass on their home entirely to their children.
It would be easier to maintain inheritance tax against this assault if we reform it to be more progressive. How about two bands? Also what about making an explicit connection between any increase revenue to the Child Trust Fund that gives all a start in life?
Support Turkey’s entrance to the European Union
Enthusiasm for Turkey joining the EU is scant across Europe. This is despite the fact that the mere possibility of membership has occasioned radical liberal change in Turkey. Often resistance to its membership is stated in baldly racist terms. Britain has a role to champion Turkey’s membership process, provided it is coupled with reform.