Causes for concern
Dig into the details of the Ashcroft polling, and you can see there is a slice of Labour support, perhaps 10 per cent to a fifth of our total support, which might be vulnerable to Tory messages, if the Tories can rid themselves of their ‘for the few’ image as the economy recovers. This group could easily be the difference between victory and defeat. Looking at what current Labour supporters say when asked if Labour or the Tories are better on certain key issues, on some pretty major issues, such as welfare and the deficit, a substantial chunk of Labour supporters rate the Tories as better than Labour. It would be too easy to look at these numbers and assume the worst. It is crucial to remember that these people are still voting Labour, and they are doing so for a reason. But if you were looking for vulnerabilities among Labour support, these are some obvious ones.
Posted by Hopi Sen on 9 January 2014
Ed Miliband deserves credit for being prepared to tackle reform of the banking and financial sector. Too many customers have complained for too long about high charges, poor service and an unwillingness to invest in well-run businesses. Yet Labour needs to remember that voters are more likely to ask us about whether their son or daughter will be able to get a good job than whether we can make it easier for them to change their bank account.
Posted by Sally Prentice on 17 January 2014
Cutting the 40p rate would be a huge financial undertaking which the country can ill-afford. However, linking a new higher rate of tax to putting a halt to fiscal drag – in other words, to stop more people being pulled into the 40p tax band – would not only be eye-catching but would show that, when it comes to the ‘squeezed middle’, Labour is willing to put its money where its mouth is. Miliband is right to want to place Labour on the side of the middle classes. Now tax has to become part of that conversation.
Posted by Robert Philpot on 16 January 2014
Welfare interventions
The new proposal in Rachel Reeves’ speech is to be welcomed – young people lacking literacy, numeracy and IT skills would be required to undertake training in order to qualify for jobseeker’s allowance. So far, so good. But we need a much more joined-up approach here. How is it that anyone can receive 13 or more years of public investment through schools and yet emerge basically illiterate and innumerate? … In our weaker schools very large numbers of pupils transfer to secondary education with reading ages well below nine. Teachers have no difficulty in predicting who of the first year in secondary schools will end up as NEETs. And NEETs they become. One aspect of a radical Labour government would be, to develop Michael Heseltine’s approach, to intervene before breakfast, before lunch, before tea and before dinner. Our intervention programme should be somewhat different. We need to intervene before birth; we need to intervene to ensure that those mothers and fathers who will find it most difficult to be good parents are helped.
Posted by Frank Field MP on 20 January 2014
Bloomberg for mayor?
Cities are dynamic actors in the global economy as major incubators of innovation and motors of economic growth yet British cities often underperform, lacking the key competences and revenue-raising powers they need to direct their futures. Making cities the centre of our politics – through directly elected mayors and a comprehensive devolution of powers – has the potential to create an ecosystem where a range of different policy ideas and approaches can flourish. In short, it is time that Westminster learnt to let go: Portsmouth does not need a Michael Fallon, it needs a Michael Bloomberg.
Posted by Andrew Lomas on 23 January 2014
Things will not change until Whitehall gives tax-raising powers to England’s largest cities. They must also gain control of the revenues from all property taxes, such as stamp duty, council tax, land tax and business rates. This should be combined with lifting the cap on local government borrowing. Having the powerful leader of a council elected by only a small cabal of councillors is simply no longer right. We need more directly elected executive mayors. They will make different decisions from those in Whitehall, but I suspect they will be better decisions. And maybe we should start putting our executive mayors into the House of Lords. This might not suit the current mayor of London, but the second chamber would benefit.
Posted by Gisela Stuart MP on 8 January 2014
Wringing our hands
In the parliamentary debate about chemical weapons last August Labour showed itself to be hesitant in supporting any kind of intervention in Syria. This, in my view, was a mistake. Not only does the UN doctrine of Responsibility to Protect legitimise intervention but the price of non-intervention to date has been a burgeoning humanitarian crisis, many more dead and injured and the establishment of al-Qaida in the country. A successful diplomatic initiative is, of course, preferable to military intervention. But diplomatic and peace efforts have completely failed so far, and show little prospect of success. Are we really going to continue to sit on the sidelines wringing our hands?
Posted by Meg Munn MP on 13 January 2014
The 33 per cent problem
Our movement is now suffering from the intellectual equivalent of the 33 per cent problem. The 33 per cent problem is what happens when the number of women in an organisation reaches a large enough chunk that people can start to believe that the battle is over; essentially, this is what happens when people say we do not need all-women shortlists because Harriet Harman is deputy leader and the judiciary can sort itself out because of Constance Briscoe.
Posted by Stephen Bush on 21 January 2014
———————————————-