George Eaton writes:
I've just returned from Queen Mary, University of
London, where some of Labour's brightest minds, including Jon Cruddas, Jonathan
Rutherford and Maurice Glasman, are meeting for a one day conference on "The Politics of One Nation Labour" (the event is being
live blogged by Labour List).
Stewart Wood, Ed Miliband's consigliere,
who sits in the shadow cabinet as minister without portfolio, opened
proceedings and drew laughter when he revealed that he'd just bought a copy of
Hayek's The Road to Serfdom (a favourite text of Margaret
Thatcher's). One of the main reasons he entered politics, he said, was Thatcher
and her belief that "ideas could be transformational". As Miliband has
hinted in his statements since her death, he and his allies take
inspiration from how she broke with the political and economic consensus of the
time and established a new governing philosophy (although one might pause to
note the irony of a Thatcher-esque project that describes itself as "one
nation").
Wood remarked that Thatcher's achievement lay in
spotting "the exhaustion of an old settlement", adding that the
public would reward those who did the same today. Miliband's one nation
approach, he said, was a "profound challenge" to the consensus that
took root in 1979.
He went on to outline the five main principles
behind "one nation" Labour:
1. A different kind of economy
2. A determination to tackle inequality
3. An emphasis on responsibility
(at the top and the bottom)
4. Protecting the elements of our common
life
5. Challenging the ethics of
neoliberalism
What does all this mean for policy? Today, Wood
emphasised what he calls a "supply side revolution from the left":
reforming the banking system so that it supports, rather than hinders,
long-term growth and an active industrial policy; working with employers to
build technical education and "filling out the middle" of our "hourglass
economy" by expanding use of the living wage. Without uttering the
dread word "predistribution",
he spoke of building an economy in which greater equality is "baked
in", not "bolted on afterwards". Rather than merely ameliorating
inequalities through the tax and benefits system (although Wood emphasised that
redistribution would remain an important part of the social democratic arsenal),
the state should act to ensure that they do not arise in the first place.
On social security, he spoke, as other Labour
figures have done, of strengthening the contributory principle, so
that there is a clearer relationship between what people put in and what they
get out. The hope is that this would revive public confidence in the welfare
state and Wood also pointed out that contributory and universal systems had
proved less vulnerable to cuts than those based on means-testing. As I noted in
my recent
piece on why Labour must defend universal pensioner benefits, history shows
that a narrower welfare state soon becomes a shallower one as the politically
powerful middle classes lose any stake in the system and the poor are
stigmatised as "dependent". The "paradox of
redistribution", as social scientists call it, is that provision for some
depends on provision for all.
Wood concluded by discussing the three main
challenges facing one nation Labour: the fiscal constraints imposed by a lack
of growth; building new institutions and restoring faith in politics. The
biggest obstacle to change, he said, was not hostility to Labour but the belief
that politicians were "all the same" and that "none of you can
change anything". He observed that while the right "thrives on the
pessimism that nothing can change", the left is "starved of
oxygen". The greatest challenge for Labour, then, is to attack the coalition's
failures while simultaneously persuading voters that they were far from
inevitable.
Labour's brightest minds...?
ReplyDeleteDid your invitation get lost in the post then young Maister L?
Kennybhoy
I am not a member of any political party.
ReplyDelete