As a losing candidate in the recent general election, in a seat Labour held from 1997-2010, I made my contribution to the four million conversations that the party pledged to have with voters. However, those conversations not only told us what the party did not want to hear, particularly in terms of the leader’s unpopularity with the public, but also exposed the paucity of our offering. This narrow pitch appeared to be determined by the 35 per cent strategy, and left the party with no coherent vision of how it would change Britain for the better. That is why it is so refreshing to see Liz Kendall not only putting forward a positive case for the future, but also emphasising continuity with the policies that led to the Labour party achieving so much when last in government.
Since 2010 we have seen a remorseless dismantling of the achievements of the last Labour government by the Tories and, until recently, the Liberal Democrats. As a local councillor in Portsmouth I have seen the decimation of Sure Start in the city by a Liberal Democrat administration, even though all parties recognise the contribution it has made to improving life chances for the poorest in our communities. Kendall has said that instead of promoting inherited wealth through tax cuts she will prioritise early years care. She knows that investing in Sure Start will bring immediate benefits for families and long-term benefits to society as a whole.
Kendall is also seeking to build on Labour’s achievement in introducing the minimum wage, by seeking to eliminate poverty pay through establishing a low pay commission that has teeth and is able to deliver a real living wage. Furthermore, she recognises that the public sector pay squeeze has gone too far, exacerbating skill shortages and sapping morale. Allied to promoting apprenticeships and training, this is a real vision of a better future for young people.
As well as recognising the need to give hope to the young, Kendall speaks with authority on building a caring society. The cuts to social care currently being implemented by local authorities are unsustainable – in Portsmouth the Labour group has successfully fought to protect dementia day-care but face further battles this year to protect basic levels of care for vulnerable residents. Kendall has been a more than credible shadow minister within the health team and has the experience and knowledge to argue for a system that cares for people, rather than one that reduces services to the lowest common denominator.
Finally, Kendall is the only candidate making the argument for sharing power with the people. She recognises that the establishment of combined authorities and the devolution of responsibilities are happening and this change should be harnessed for the good of local communities, rather than simply delivering savings to George Osborne. This completes a positive vision for the future and one where, not only are Labour values truly embedded, but the needs of the modern world are at the forefront.
———————————
John Ferrett is the leader of the Labour group for Portsmouth City Council. He tweets @John_Ferrett
———————————
Photo: Liz Kendall
As significant as those individual and specific policy differences are (even if they were to amount to much in the end), they are hardly the revolutionary or restructuring that the society needs if it s to undue much of the damage done by Thatcher-Blair continuum over several decades. Have you ever considered that a UK constructed to support a vital manufacturing sector and growth built around something more than a financial-housing and bubble banking, might be a socialism worthy of a Labour Party offer of a real challenge to the Tories?
That is why the policies of a national investment bank, nationalisation of the railways and utilities, and increased wealth to the working population as opposed to ‘printing money’ for bank bailouts is so advanced and modern thinking. On the day that Osbourne sells RBS shares costing the taxpayers billions and the national health service recruitment frozen to essential staff only, this contribution reads too flat-footed for real structural progress. We could have had those things referred to under previous Labour Administrations without disturbing the billions squandered on tax support for the those who starve reserves from much needed investment if there was any real heat-felt as opposed to opportunist grabbing onto ANY extras that leave the wealth locked out of democratic access.