Downing Street is right to highlight the triumvirate of the economy, public services and reform of politics as the areas which hold the key to winning the next election. But in spite of yet another mauling at the polls, a near toppling of the prime minister and the screaming scandal of parliamentary expenses, the absence of a comprehensive route map for these three crucial arenas is astonishing. It’s like waiting for Godot. So much is promised, but so much remains a mystery.
While exactly the right action has been taken on the economy, (and it’s no longer absurd to say that we might see a turnup for the books within the lifetime of this government), to rely on the voters giving us credit as the sole way of winning the next election would be folly. So, too, are the current dividing lines which demean the intelligence of voters by pretending Labour won’t have to cut back some spending on public services. Let us of course make the argument that the Tories will make cuts indiscriminately. They will leave parents struggling with childcare by massacring Sure Start. They will create a new generation of the long-term unemployed by slashing the support packages the government has put in place. And they will halt progress on child poverty by reversing the year-on-year increases in child benefit Labour has presided over.
But Labour will have to find areas to cut, too. The difference will be in what we decide to stop spending on and the manner in which we do it. For example, putting aside arguments about the principle of ID cards, are they really worth the massive expenditure in a time of recession? The opposition are ranged against them, the public aren’t clamouring for them, the party doesn’t much fancy them, only the government beats a solitary drum for the things. A public service entitlement card might make a better argument if we are to make the case in the future, but it might be worth parking the debate for now.
Similarly, keeping a nuclear deterrent is important for the medium-term security of this country, but is Trident really worth the expenditure? Cogent arguments have been made by respected politicians and defence experts for equipping our new class of Astute submarines with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles which will save money because they are already in the pipeline. The campaign for unilateral disarmament may have been a shibboleth for the left for too long, but the campaign to keep Trident may become the swansong of Labour’s right if it doesn’t look at it afresh. There will be other aspects of policy we may need to jettison now, hard though that may be.
And while we must find savings to narrow the fiscal gap, so we must find savings to spend on other areas. Stephen Byers has pointed out that the cut in VAT, while fiscally sensible, may have run its course politically. He has argued that the money could be put to better use by lifting the poorest 1.2 million taxpayers out of tax altogether by raising the income tax threshold. Looking at other areas, it is obvious that social housing is an issue Labour cannot ignore any longer. Local authorities should be given more freedom to borrow to build social housing, not in suffocating segregated concrete estates, but in progressive, environmentally-friendly, mixed communities. Labour should also consider planning for universal childcare in the long term, which is the only way that its transformational welfare policy can work without penalising single parents who want to work but can’t afford, or find, the childcare which is best for their children. Labour has talked endlessly about the Scandinavian model, now is the time to add the final piece to the puzzle.
It is disappointing to see that the launch of the new strategy on public service reform, the second key area, was postponed for want of new ideas. Here are a few which Progress has been championing consistently: elected mayors in all cities; unitary and top-tier authorities with the authority to appoint police commanders and negotiate local area agreements; an education credit weighted to give more to children from more disadvantaged backgrounds and with special educational needs; and individual budgets for all patients with long-term conditions and those eligible for state funding for social care who want one. New Labour has lots of ideas, it’s just the will that’s needed to push them through.
Finally, there has been a welcome focus on constitutional reform. Once again, however, there is a danger that the words will not match reality. Progress is supporting a call for a referendum on electoral reform to be held on general election day – preferably AV-plus, which was proposed all that time ago by Roy Jenkins. A fully elected House of Lords is similarly a non-negotiable. A full list of the ideas we think the government should adopt is on p14-15. This isn’t a middle class obsession, as David Miliband agrees in this issue’s interview. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change the way we do politics, to stop pretending that one party has all the answers, to make sure that politicians fight for every last vote and to find a way of bringing back some honour to representative politics.