At a time when politics is shifting, now is the moment for us to show how Labour’s values are the centre ground of British life and can offer a way forward. That’s what we discussed last Thursday in Sunderland at the first of a series of Progress events that will be taking place around the country.
The first thing we have to be is confident about our economic record. The thing we got wrong was the regulation of the banks, but then so did the French, the Germans, the Americans and George Osborne; remember when he criticised us for being too tough on them? Prior to the economic meltdown, we had reduced the debt we inherited from John Major’s government and the Tories cannot accuse us now of overspending when at the time they had promised to match our spending pound for pound.
The real test of our politics, however, is what we do when times are tough. The reason we took the banks into public ownership, brought in the future jobs fund and helped people with mortgage interest was because we understand what losing your job or your home does to people’s lives and their families. And that’s why what George Osborne and David Cameron are doing now is so wrong – do we really have to learn the lessons of the 1930s all over again?
The debate about economic policy is not an academic one about whose analysis is right. What government does – or does not do – has an enormous impact on the hopes and aspirations of communities and families not just now, but in the years ahead.
People are worried about their jobs, rising prices and the high cost of housing, and it is clear that the chancellor’s economic plan isn’t working. Confidence is falling, growth has stopped and unemployment is rising. That means less tax income, higher benefit payments, and more borrowing – £158 billion more than planned. The government won’t now balance the books by 2015. What’s more, nothing like enough private sector jobs are being created to replace those being lost in the public sector.
So we need a new plan to help get growth going – it is after all the best way of paying down the deficit – and that’s why our temporary reduction in VAT and a repeat of our bankers’ bonus tax to help 100,000 young people find work and build 25,000 affordable homes would help.
The big lesson we have all learned from the last four years is what happens when your economy turns out to be unsustainable. The question now is – what does the economy of the future look like? Ed Miliband has led on this with his visionary conference speech last year. What he talked about then is being discussed by everyone now. Why? Because he is really on to something. Add to that the two other great challenges facing our world – how to ensure a sustainable climate and how seven billion people and more will be able to live sustainably on a small and fragile planet – and you have the big tasks to which Labour politics must address itself.
Tony Blair once spoke about the kaleidoscope being shaken, with the pieces all in flux. That is certainly the case now. My constituents want a fairer society, where reward relates better to effort – whether that’s about how people are paid or benefits given. They can see the argument for doing things in a much more sustainable way, not least because we have witnessed what happens when they aren’t. People want to know what their sons and daughters will be doing for a living in the future in an economy that has to have a better balance.
The biggest threat is not the scale of the challenge. We have faced up to, and overcome, big threats to our country before. It is, rather, that people might lose faith in the capacity of politics to do something about all this. Tough times can make for hard political hearts, and yet our history should give us encouragement.
Look at local government. Born in adversity it quickly became an ocean of innovation for 19th century Britain. People of civic mind and civic virtue led the way. They brought gas and electricity, and hospitals and schools to communities. They created the first public parks. They built homes. And they provided the clean water and the sewers that did more than anything else to beat disease and increase the life expectancy of our forebears. They didn’t wait to be told what to do by the latest government circular. They looked around, saw the problems, and got on with it. That’s exactly what we need today, but power in England is too centralised.
That’s why we should give communities the ability to do more things for themselves. The backdrop is the debate about the future of Scotland, and the fact that over the last few weeks and months, the government has said it is prepared to devolve powers to the core cities over, for example, transport, housing, skills and broadband. It’s the right thing to do, but why only to our core cities? What about the rest of local government in England?
I think the time has come to be much bolder, and to make a new offer – an English Deal – that would be open to all authorities. A deal in which these powers – on transport, housing, skills, and ways of boosting economic development – are devolved but with local government deciding the basis on which it wishes to receive them. In other words, rather than the government poring over a list of approved councils or a map of new boundaries in deciding whom to entrust with greater powers and where, local government should decide how it wants to organise itself for the purpose of taking greater responsibility.
It could be a city with a mayor, or a city with a leader, or a city region, or a county, or another combination that makes sense locally, including of course working with business. An organic, bottom-up approach that would be truly radical and one that would show that Whitehall is serious about transferring power.
And why do we need to do this? Well, just think of the great challenges of this century. A population that is growing and ageing and will need caring for. The public health epidemic of obesity. Finding a way to live sustainably and recognising that we depend on the climate and the natural environment for our very existence. Building the infrastructure we need for the new economy – high-speed rail and even higher-speed broadband. All of these need local ideas and strong local government in abundance. And the more we show what Labour can do that is visionary in one place, the less difficult it will seem elsewhere.
We have a great opportunity here to meet the British public on the new centre ground of politics. Let’s use it.
—————————————————————————————
Hilary Benn MP is the shadow secretary of state for communities and local government
I find it difficult to swallow any talk about the “visionary” speech of Ed Milliband – good ethical behavior is not new its a choice. In the states hundreds if not thousands of bankers are in or have served terms in jail – how many in the UK? Ethics comes from the leadership at the top – the bitter taste of MP claims still exists with ordinary people.
There is much discussion on Scotland which causes many to look in their own back yard.
Hilary and amy other figures in the party write about ethics, opportunity to meet the British public, New deals and try and conjure up some historic reference points.
How can anyone in the labour Party have authority to speak on any ethical subject when the party itself denies members in Norhern Ireland the right to take part in Elections. Untill the Labour Party allows Labour members in Northertn Ireland to stand in Elections it will never be the party it should be – leading on ethics and speaking up for all the people living in Britain – not just south of England
Labour politicians constantly skirting round the issue – no one wants to address the issue of an English Parliament, which is the logical solution to many of the problems mentioned. Structurally local government in England is a shambles – partly the result of Labour’s disastrous shire county unitary government plans in 2008. There is unitary government in some areas, two tier government in others, and three elsewhere. There are Mayors in some cities and towns and not in others. London has its own regional/city government with extra power but elsewhere lacks this. Why can’t other regions and cities have something similar (too radical an option!). None of the main parties have a coherent policy for governance at any level in England – from the national, regional, local to parish. Labour had a chance to create real local decentralisation by giving local councils more control over their finance by giving them local fiscal autonomy, particualrly in terms of raising their own revenue thru local taxes. It talked big on local govt in the noughties but didn’t deliver.
Benn is simply talking more tinkering round the edges, not real autonomy and decentralisation – heard it all before – and not that long ago (check out some of the recent policy documents).
oooh look the Tories just privatised Bournmouth
This is a welcome debate. But the approach suggested of tinkering around the edges fails to recognise some simple truths. Power, to be wielded effectively, needs both control of funding and legitimacy. Devolving ‘powers’ to councils on a piecemeal, ad hoc basis without addressing control of tax revenues, and doing so in a manner that is not understandable to ordinary people is destined to fail. Remember the referendum on a Northeast Assembly? What we need is a re-vamp of our constitutional settlement that focuses on delivering a clear demarcation between the realm of local government and that of central government. And yes this probably means addressing the West Lothian question to boot. Only by doing this can we possibly hope to get both the legitimacy required and foster the re-vitalisation of local democracy. Labour needs to trust that power in the hands of local people, clearly understood and funded will lead to a flourishing of a new class of elected officials, which can only benefit the Westminster bubble into which the best will rise. It must shake off a hundred years belief in the supremacy of the centralised state and let a thousand flowers bloom.
” fiscal autonomy “to Councils ? !!!!! are you out of your mind, don’t you realise in most cases that would be like bringing back the Sherriff of Nottingham (yes ,that one ) People at local level ,needy people ,all people
have little enough representation as it is, muppet. You do not understand how many tinpot fascists there are out there .