(Opinion) Labour Party: What Happens When You Try The Centre When It Doesn’t Exist

With the news of the conservatives being five points of the Labour party according to the latest YouGov/Sunday Times poll, I think it’s fair to say that Labour have paid the price of not attacking a coalition  government that has floundered for most part of its three years in power.

Labour  have failed to democratic how they will be different from the conservative led coalition as the have often failed to make simple but devastating arguments that would have put the conservatives on the back foot in policy debates. Instead for the last three years all we have seen is Labour make the odd strong argument against the conservative led coalition government on all issues except the ones that count.

Labour have largely been dithering in debates about spending cuts as part of the government’s favoured austerity programme as George Osborne, a far better political strategist than Chancellor, has managed to browbeat the party into deliberation by moving to the right and the Labour Party, often shirking the opportunity to make the key arguments against spending cuts, has now stated that they will stick to the same spending policy as the current government and not reserve any their cuts.

Despite the utter failure of the government’s policy of austerity measures, the question to ask in the face of Labour leader Ed Milliband and Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls effectively backing the policy position of the current government is why? the only answer available is that they can’t and won’t. Both Miliband and Balls were part of the last Labour government and share views of the New Labour evangelists of moving the party to further to the right in the quest of reach the centre of the political spectrum which would not be a problem if they didn’t start every policy argument taking a less hawkish position than the conservatives.

Whether the government should be making such large public spending cuts at all is never debated, where to cut is, so is the speed of cuts effectively making the whole nation approach a wholly political issue as a bunch of managers looking for entry level staff to cull. 

We often hear the comparison often made by government looking to swing the scythe of the family who upon falling on difficult times look to cut their expenses but obviously, government cannot and should not be  a family as a family only have an obligation to its members while a government has an obligation to a citizenry that bankroll it and , in theory, hold it to account.And should the public favour a growth focused economic policy rather than the current policy in place that ineffectively tries to stop the bleeding,  the opposition should take a position that establishes that they would be different in power rather than try to establish ‘credibility’ by taking a slightly softer position than its rivals in power.

In sum, Labour have largely failed to attack a coalition government that has largely dithered in power and has overseen periods of negative growth coupled with growth so miniature it’s hardly worth reporting. Thanks to some smart strategy and the most vulgar use of the self /other distinction, Labour have been backed into a corner and as always moved to the right rather than making the counter argument and this pattern continue, Labour may end up being thankful for being five points ahead instead of the 10 they have been accustomed to for some time.

(Politics) George Osborne Prediction: Why George Osborne may lose his job as chancellor

We are more and more being measured by the results we produced as workers from productivity to levels of imagination and creativity but politicians remain immune to this focus on performance with George Osborne being a major case in point, with the British heading into yet another recession and having lost its triple A rating (which means that it may cost the country more borrow money), the question is how is George Osborne still chancellor. People across Britain would be justified to ask this question but a better question would be why on earth was he appointed a Chancellor of the exchequer in the first place?.

Osborne would be much more effective as a strategist in the PM office alongside David Cameron instead of facing attack from all quarters every time more dismal economic indicators are publicly published.

His political skill is second to none proved by his ability out do shadow chancellor Ed Balls despite the economic horror show taking place under his watch. He has also done pretty well in making Labour scramble on many of the issues Labour should dominate and have dominated in the past such as the welfare state and pensions. However, for all his skill as a strategist, he cannot manoeuvre his way out of negative economic indicators many have laid at his door.

The Conservative strategy to excuse the lack of economic progress has been to place blame on the Labour government mishandling of the economy but with Labour soaring ahead of the Tories in most polls available, such a strategy is clearly not working.

Labour has issued attack after attack against the Conservatives policy of austerity which has experienced some push back globally with many countries seeing the need to have a growth strategy. Despite this growing need, Osborne, to his and government’s detriment, has stuck doggedly to a programme of deficit first and all else be damned approach which at the same time is not working and is tarnishing any hopes he may have to lead his party.

You always know that a minister is in trouble when his predecessors are coming out the wood work and throwing in their two cents about what needs to happen next and potential rivals for the conservative leadership are urging the minister in question to change his position which has both happened to George Osborn over the last few weeks.It seems that only thing that is keeping him in office is the Prime Minster who has refuse to press the trigger on Osborne in spite of the fact that it may be for the better for Osborne and indeed the economy.

In sum. George Osborne may lose his job but not anytime soon due to the prime mister having ample time to get rid of Osborne but refusing to pull the trigger. However with the economy in bad shape, David Cameron may have no choice but to bring his political ally close to him in the interest of the country and indeed Osborne himself. 

(Opinion) Osborne Autumn Statement: Moral Midgetry In The Form Of a Statement

The Conservative Party can be cruel, the Conservative Party can be cold, but what you can count on is that the Conservative party will be predictable. Surprise, surprise, chancellor George Osborne announced welfare cuts in the Autumn statement targeting the unemployed and working class as these cuts “will see most working age benefits including Job Seekers Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance and Income Support, Child Tax Credit and the Working Tax Credits rise below inflation at one per cent for three years[1]”

These cuts ironically hurts the institution conservatives appeal to the most (save the business community, of course) the family as they punish single parent families as “single parents stand to lose £330 of their 2011-12 income in their 2015-16 pay packets” while couples are less hit, they are hit nonetheless as “a couple who have children and rely on childcare are set to lose on average £217 and a couple with children in which only one adult works will lose £122”[2]

Many argue, mostly conservatives and new Labour relics, that the class wars are over, they’re right, but only because the rich and privileged have won. The chancellor, who is both rich and privileged has targeted the welfare system from the off for cuts as the conservative party have made it a point to tackle ‘scroungers’ but have done very little to tackle to regulate the excesses of corporate greed or even manage the economy efficiently.

The Labour party have dithered in their response to the Autumn statement, presumably coming up with a plan on how best not to look like they care about the plight of people who make up most of the country as according to a ‘senior Labour figure’, backing people who probably vote Labour may be “politically suicidal” as it leaves “the party open to charges that it sides with “scroungers” and is in denial over the need to cut the benefits bill”[3].

This reveals the cowardice of the Labour party which was created to represent the poor and disenfranchised which currently being led by a son of a Marxist who seems to have real anxiety over standing up for the poor and unemployed. While it is quite clear Labour will not return to the old social democratic position any time soon, it should at least be able to put up a serious defense of the working poor who mostly vote Labour in their droves.

In sum, the welfare cuts announced in the Autumn Statement was no shocks as the coalition government led by the Conservatives has proven from the get go that welfare cuts were on the menu and the working poor and the unemployed had better watch out. The lack of response from the Labour Party has shown that the Labour party have been cowardly in defending the poor as they try to avoid the conservatives accusing them of siding with the poor, which, more often than not opt for Labour as the conservatives, to be sure, have made clear who they are for and who they are against.  

---

[1] N. Simons, 2012, George Osborne’s Benefit Cut Hurts Single Mothers The Most, Research  Finds,  http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/12/07/george-osbornes-benefit-cut-single-mothers_n_2260093.html

[2] Ibid

[3] T. Heim, 2012, Ed Miliband to wage war on George Osborne over benefit cuts,  http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/08/ed-miliband-george-osborne-welfare

(Opinion) Coalition government cabinet reshuffle: why is George Osborne still in office?

While the world is full of things that are beyond comprehension, George Osborne remaining as Chancellor of the Exchequer after the cabinet reshuffle has just joined the ranks. In the government’s recent cabinet reshuffle there has been some strange and expected changes such as the demotion of Ken Clarke (expected) and promotion of Jeremy Hunt to health secretary (strange) but why Prime Minster David Cameron has not thrown George Osborne a break and move him to a position closer to the PM office is very strange given the calls across the political spectrum to bench him or move him out of the treasury.

Perhaps it is because he believes in the programme currently in place at the treasury as he hasn’t failed to move out minsters who don’t agree him on key issues such as Kenneth Clarke and Justine Greening (the latter of which has sparked a major rift within the conservative party[1]) or ministers who have performed poorly such as Andrew Lansley. The fact that George Osborne remains in office reveals not only move to the right in the cabinet[2]   but a preference for loyalty over performance.

While George Osborne did not inherit an economy in great shape, his implementation of trademark conservative policies has done him and the coalition government in general no favours. George Osborne budgets have made large cuts in taxes, housing and education while presiding over Britain’s continuous slide into a double dip recession. However his performance is really the problem so much as his unpopularity with only 34% of the British thinks George Osborne is “doing a good job”[3].

The lack of change in the cabinet reshuffle, at least in positions that are key to the implementation of conservative policies, represents an assertion of a prime minster determined to get rid of the well earned tag of being government of that has only mastered the art of the u-turn. However as a result of this, the government’s main opposition to this assertion in policy will be the conservatives as the government is already receiving criticism for its changes in the cabinet. London Mayor Boris Johnson was quick to denounce the removal of Justine greening from the position of transport secretary due to her opposition to the addition of a third runway at Heathrow describing her as a “first rate Transport Secretary”[4].

In sum, David Cameron may be a conservative prime minster but has revealed his allegiance to his allies amenable to favoured policies rather to efficient and effective governance. While no one in politics expects a politician not to turn to his cronies in a time of need, for it to be done so openly for all to see is what gives reason for criticism. Geroge Osborne is a prime example of this criticism as he has performed poorly and is highly unpopular yet manages to stay in the cabinet despite his strengths is in political rather than economic strategy.   

---

[1] H. Siddique, 2012, Heathrow runway row: Cameron flies into storm of Tory criticism, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/05/heathrow-runway-row-cameron-tory

[2] P. Wintour and N. Watt, 2012,  David Cameron’s right turn in cabinet reshuffle, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/sep/04/david-cameron-government-reshuffle-cabinet?intcmp=239

[3] P. Kellner, 2012,Budget hurts Tories but doesn’t help Labour,

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/03/23/budget-hurts-tories-doesnt-help-labour/

[4] Quoted by P. Wintour and N. Watts, 2012, David Cameron’s right turn in cabinet reshuffle, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/sep/04/david-cameron-government-reshuffle-cabinet?intcmp=239

(Opinion) George Osborne: How Many Enemies Can One Man Have?

"George Osborne has got no business experience. He has never worked outside politics. He is doing surprisingly well for a Chancellor on work experience. But really in a torrid time like this, I think we do need absolutely the best people available."

Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/george-osborne-urged-to-quit-as-gdp-slumps-16189918.html#ixzz21gvzS5zB

With the news Britain's economy contracting  0.7 percent, you'll never see the knives come out for a government minster like this ever again. Everybody from the Lib Dems to the CBI (shock, horror!) have criticized George Osborne's handling of the economy, and even some have calling for his head. 

While the criticism is widespread, it's not exactly unfair. the coalition government have stuck to a hard nosed austerity programme cutting hard and fast on spending in education and health while devising no strategy for growth. Vince Cable was trotted out on Newsnight to give a full-throated defense of Osborne and ended up talking about what the government would do rather than the plans the chancellor of the exchequer has for tackling a sluggish economy.

What is clearly notable is the lack of response from the prime minister or indeed any other conservative as one of their most prominent members is taking a real beating in the press.Even the defense offered by Cable seems strange as Cable clearly would like his job. 

Osborne can kiss goodbye any plans for leadership of the conservative party as polls indicate he is as unpopular as his policies, making him unelectable. Osborne was always a strange pick for the head of Treasury as he is a competent strategist and is a big reason why the conservatives are even in power.

In sum, George Osborne would be well advised to watch his back, sides and front as the knives are out and the wolves are closing in.