Labour needs to reject cuts….

Here we go again, we have to be candid, honest and fair says Andrew Rawnsley in the Observer. Yes, but on whose terms? Labour’s response is to cut, cut, cut and cut. They aren’t being candid about the power relationships in this society. Who decides the cuts? Do they consider what kind of society is left after deep vicious cuts? These cuts feed the monster of the kleptocratic elite… And Labour continues to carry the baton of cuts. There are so many questions which are never posed let alone answered.

 As things have turned out, whoever wins the next election is projected to inherit a deficit of nearly £80bn. Even once that is cleared, the national debt is forecast to be around £1.5tn. That will be a straitjacket on government for many years.

Nothing about shadow government and the impact of think-tanks, nothing about institutional power. These institutions have been corrupting governments. Nothing about tax havens. Nothing about exposing the corruption and greed and actually doing something concrete about it. Instead we have the Chris Leslie lets just cut, cut and cut combined with the ethos of Cruddas/IPPR et al which, in actual fact, is just an extension of New Labour politics. Does anybody out there still have any illusions with Cruddas being left-wing? Please remove your rose-tinted specs because this man is nothing but a class traitor.But then I don’t think he gives a toss….

According to  study by the IPPR thinktank (ah yes another thinktank)

The report is expected to look at whether benefit payments can be linked more closely to levels of contributions through changes to the national insurance system. Senior figures believe that Labour must counter the impression that it supports a “something for nothing” benefits system by looking at radical change.

Furthermore
Looking ahead to the report’s publication, Cruddas says: “It sets out three broad strategies for social renewal: spread power and responsibility to build democracy and strengthen society; foster contribution and reciprocity to re-establish a sense of fairness and justice; and strengthen our shared institutions to help tackle social problems for good. These establish the foundations on which we can build a competitive wealth-creating economy.”
Nothing about confronting the lie regards to ‘something for nothing’ culture. Smashing that lie that it is the fault of the individual, it is their failure they are unemployed. Nothing about the ‘something for nothing’ culture of the rich and the rich are doing splendidly at the moment, austerity isn’t driving them to the wall. We have a lop-sided, unequal and oppressive economic system which is predicated towards the powerful while the powerless get kicked in the teeth and Labour want to continue this trend. There’s nothing about overhauling the economy to make it more equal it’s about continuing on in the political trajectory. Cut public spending and sod the consequences. What kind of society will we become? The powerless pay while rich get richer?
Does Ed Miliband think about the consequences of deep vicious cuts or should he just ring up Rupert Murdoch and ask him what’s best for the ruling elite? Labour is running scared as usual, running towards triangulation and populism. We are left with Tories-lite. Same old same old. Ed Miliband will continue this he won’t/can’t shift the Labour Party instead he capitulates exposing his spinelessness. He may toss a few crumbs to the masses but he hasn’t the guts to push for change, overhauling the economic and financial system. It’s reverse Colbertism.
On the issue of benefits closely linked to the levels of contributions, what happens if you have never had the chance to pay in contributions? Do they starve? Possibly yes. They will go without. The hard choices is that the powerless in this society will pay again, again and again while the rich won’t.
The national debt is forecast to be around £1.5tn. Who is it owed to? Is it ‘hot’ money? Is it government bonds? Is the debt held by pension funds? There is no analysis by Labour (certainly Rawnsley doesn’t question it except to say cuts are the answer) about the debt other than the way forward is to cut the public sector and welfare state. 

 

Laughably

The report will contain proposals for a one-off levy of £450m on Britain’s £180bn consumer credit industry which the IPPR says could create enough affordable lenders to take on Britain’s legal loan sharks. It says that, as well as a new legal cap on the total cost of credit, Britain needs a new generation of not-for-profit lenders with enough capital to compete with firms like Wonga, Quick Quid and Payday Express.

Now here’s a thought… how about paying people a living wage? How about paying people enough money on their benefits so they can live as opposed to exist? Bit revolutionary there.

There are alternatives to cuts to the public sector and the welfare state. But it takes some guts and backbone… and I am talking about Labour. Are they up for the challenge? Some how I suspect not. Rather it’s about carry on with the consensus.

Cruddas who holds himself up as some clever man really needs to read Andrew Fisher’s exemplary book, ‘The Failed Experiment’ because there are alternatives to cuts and in doing so create a more equal society. As Andrew calls his final chapter, “Building an economy that works”… Not continue with one that has crashed and burned and caused so much suffering. How’s about cutting Trident? Stop spending vast amounts of money on death and warfare?  Though I wouldn’t mind a bit of waging war on tax havens? An economy that operates in the public interest? Public ownership? Overhauling the financial system? Living wage? And so on…

Instead as Robin Chater (head of the Federation of European Employers) states: The UK is turning into an old-style third world country with low pay growth for most workers below managerial level, widening pay differentials and poor levels of capital investment.

As Andrew Fisher argues at the end of his book, the sole focus of economic debate today seems to be about what leads to economic growth. But why are we obsessed with economic growth? Instead of prioritising consuming more stuff it should be about what matters most.

The change in average living standards, whether inequality and poverty are reducing or increasing and whether unemployment is up or down. In a civilised society these things matter more…

Unfortunately with Labour it’s about carrying on with the status quo they don’t want to address the power of the City of London, tax havens, the power structures that exist in this society. Miliband with the aid of Cruddas and other useless apparatchiks will take us down the road of barbarism. They chuck us a few crumbs but the goodies are left for the powerful. Ah, but we never know they may be confronted by a crisis that forces them to change their policies. Maybe? But what Labour doesn’t appear to care less about is what kind of society we are becoming and will continue to become with constant deep wounding cuts? This continued scapegoating and demonising which they don’t challenge and never have? While Labour fiddles society burns.

The finger of blame is still not being pointed at the real culprits, the real scroungers and the real ‘something for nothing’ vultures. It’s about taking Labour to task. They may (may) win the next election with a slim majority but if they continue to cut, cut, cut and cut they will lose the next one and the Labour Party will disappear into oblivion. It’s a stark warning to these New Labour apparatchiks and Ed Miliband was never the alternative to NL he was part of that problem. Same politics different leader.

It is about getting that alternative narrative out there that there are alternatives to cuts, whether putting pressure on Labour will make any difference certainly the trade union bureaucracy isn’t forthcoming in fighting austerity instead it is up to activists on the ground to take this up and argue that if we want a better more equal society we have to fight for it.

NB: If you want to read something that goes into depth about the economic system, why we are in the mire and what are the alternatives then read Andrew Fisher’s The Failed Experiment.