Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Politics

What does Labour need to do to get back into government?

64 replies

MrPants · 17/01/2012 14:39

As many may well know, I?m no fan of Labour. However, the coalition is making far too many mistakes for my liking and needs to sharpen up their act too. The main thing which allows the coalition to get away with so much is, in my opinion, the woeful state of the opposition. Put simply, Labour need some good ideas and they need to come out fighting. The problem is that many, possibly most, voters hold Labour responsible for much of the country?s current economic woes, and, in any case, there is no money left for the traditional Labour solution of firehosing money at every problem in sight. Nevertheless, arguably ?New? Labours greatest and most durable successes were zero or low cost ideas ? ideas like sorting out Northern Ireland, introducing Civil Partnerships and free entry to museums. They need a whole load more ideas like that to have any hope of returning to government any time soon.

I hope this doesn?t turn into another ?Ed is crap? thread ? I?m looking for sensible, vaguely costed solutions that you think might just get the coalition worried and show that the next election isn?t a foregone conclusion.

Here?s my starter for ten.

  1. Abolish Corporation Tax for UK businesses opening, or foreign businesses relocating, to the 25 worst employment black-spots in the UK. This will undercut our European competitors and provide many much needed jobs and regeneration directly into our most blighted constituencies. That these places will probably already be Labour strongholds makes it all the more unbelievable that they haven?t tried this already. This is an affordable idea because it applies to businesses that may not have chosen to set up at all ? the cost saving comes from the reduced welfare bill of employing new workers who would have otherwise remained workless.
  2. Suggest areas where spending cuts could be made, rather than a ?yah-boo-it-sucks-to-be-you? style battle every time the coalition try to shred a ha?penny off some obscure budget. For example, all of those diversity co-ordinators and non-jobs that proliferated throughout the Labour years, are ?all? of them strictly necessary?
  3. Simplify the tax code by merging all personal taxation (income tax, Nat Insurance, Cap Gains etc) into one ?super-income? tax whereby any income, regardless of how it is ?earned? (whether it is by wages, dividends, interest payments etc.) is taxed at the same flat rate (somewhere around the 35-40% mark so that no-one, irrespective of where they are on the pay scale will end up paying more) with a larger, more generous personal allowance of, for example, £15k. The advantage of this is that huge swathes of the poorest are completely removed from paying tax at all, the marginal tax rate of coming off benefits is far less and the system is significantly simplified.
  4. Rather than pay child allowance, or various other in-work benefits, simply raise the parents? personal allowance instead. This has the twin effect of removing bureaucracy and it would no longer be seen as a state handout. That?s my starter. I accept that none of these ideas will win an election in their own right ? however, Labour?s strategy has to be simple enough. They must find a way to maximise private sector jobs, build growth, reduce spending and try and keep the Unions together (both the Trades Unions and the Union of England and Scotland) to even have a hope of winning an election.
OP posts:
TheCrackFox · 17/01/2012 18:53

I'd like a complete apology about the Iraq war and TBH I would like to see Tony Blair in prison. I would maybe consider voting Labour again.

Ed Milliband is crap and he will have to go.

Murmansk · 17/01/2012 18:53

If lots of people have realised that all the main parties are standing on the same platform, it can only be a good thing.

TheSecondComing · 17/01/2012 18:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MildlyNarkyPuffin · 17/01/2012 18:47

No. They won't vote.

ElderberrySyrup · 17/01/2012 18:40

Slug - 'The thing is claig, it's the traditional socialist voters that are deserting the Labour Party in droves. '

But where are they going? Who are they going to vote for next time? When it comes to the crunch won't they vote Labour like they always have?

claig · 17/01/2012 18:35

The public has to a great extent lost faith in the parties, it thinks "they are all the same". The public knows that none of them are going to wave a magic wand and put the big things right overnight. The public accept that. But that is precisely why the little things count so much. Any party that doesn't stand with the public and can't even put the little things right will have no chance of putting the big things right.

claig · 17/01/2012 17:47

The rocketing train prices, the ever increasing exorbitant energy prices, the ever increasing taxes - all of these things affect all of the people - the socialists and the 'squeezed middle'. There should be no divide between the working class and the 'squeezed middle', they are all in the same boat, they are all struggling and being ripped off in the same way.

None of them are rolling in it, they are all people being squeezed. Any party that can unite them will win an election hands down.

claig · 17/01/2012 17:34

I don't think there ar eenough of teh traditional socialist voters to swing an election. It is the 'squeezed middle' and the centre that swings election. It was those people who voted for Blair and kept Labour in. The traditional socialist voters don't have much of an effective alternative to voting Labour if they want a left wing government.

What wins elections is emotion not reason. The people have to trust the party they vote for and believe that they are on the side of the people. It is little things that win elections, not big things. The minutiae of macroeconomic policy is frankly irrelevant and above teh heads of most of teh electorate - that's OK for Newsnight and keen politicos, but the public don't make decisions based on that.

You have to read the Daily Mail to feel the pulse of the public. It is little things like not placing punitive fines on the public for putting their bins out on teh wrong day or clamping down on these cowboy clampers who fine the public exorbitant amounts for parking somewhere for too long. It is the public being ripped off that angers the public and shows them that no one is on their side. These huge parking fees for parking in hospital car parks etc. Governments need to stand with the people, with the 'squeezed middle', they need to care and provide populist policies that stop the people being penalised.

Clamp down on fat cats and casino capitalism and rip off Britain. Force energy companies to lower their prices. Put a levy on them. Show the public that there is someone who is with them. It's very simple stuff, but it requires the leaders to understand the people and actually care about the people. The Tories have scrapped the £1000 bin fines. They understand these things, because they read the Daily Mail and know it is in tune with the 'squeezed middle'.

The public vote on emotion. That's how Blair got in in teh first place, due to the disgust of the sleaze of teh Tory party at that time. The public has to believe that teh party they vote for is on their side and I now think that teh 'blue Labour' thing is an attempt to show teh public that Labour is not against teh 'squeezed middle'. It will upset doctrinaire socialists, but if they don't appeal to the 'squeezed middle', then Labour won't get back in again.

slug · 17/01/2012 17:13

The thing is claig, it's the traditional socialist voters that are deserting the Labour Party in droves.

A bit more of the socialist and a bit less of the "We agree with the Tories but we'll be gentler" may find their traditional working class base returning to the ballot box.

claig · 17/01/2012 17:04

At first I didn't think that this 'blue Labour' idea of Lord Glasman was a good thing, as it seemed to go against what Labour used to stand for. But now I am beginning to think that it is the right thing for Labour to do in order to win power again. Many of the 'squeezed middle' and Middle England Daily Mail readers don't trust Labour because they think that Labour is not on their side, that they will carry on 'squeezing' them, abandonong them and being hostile to them. But if Labour can convince them that they are on their side, that they are the party of the people and the party of the 'squeezed middle', then many of the 'squeezed middle' will turn to Labour.

This seems to be what Labour are starting to do with many speeches supporting the 'squeezed middle' and the middle classes. If they can get rid of their ideological hostility to the 'squeezed middle' they will gain support, because the 'squeezde middle' are not in favour of fat cats and casino capitalism and lavish banker bonuses, because it is always the 'squeezed middle' that ends up bearing the brunt of the cost.

I think they will try to do this. But the big question is will the 'squeezed middle' trust them and believe that they are for real or will they think that this is just more New Labour spin and a socialist stunt too far.

bradbourne · 17/01/2012 16:56

In many ways, it isn't always worthwhile coming up with any original policy ideas unless an election is imminent because the opposing parties often end up just "nicking" them. It happened to the Tories when they were in opposition and it will happen to Labour now.

Labour's best hope is surely to get a credible leadership team in place. At the moment, I don't think the two Eds cut it and can't see this improving any time soon.

niceguy2 · 17/01/2012 16:54

MrPants, all good ideas there but probably more traditional Tory ideas than Labour.

The problem is that Labour voters traditionally are the working class and disenfranchised poor who have virtually no clue about economics. So your first idea would simply be seen by many of their voters as letting the rich get richer.

Right now Labour sound completely ridiculous. Up until last week they opposed every cut whilst claiming they'd equally tackle the deficit. Now they are shouting from the rooftops how they agree with the cuts which are proposed (eg. wage freeze, schools building program).

Labour also need to move away from Union control. Ultimately they are still utterly dependent upon Trade Union funding. The problem is that the trade unions are simply seen by most of us as out of touch with reality.

So right now it's clearly obvious that we need to shrink the size of our public sector and address the public pensions problem. But Labour cannot say that for fear of upsetting the unions. Until they can say what's right instead of what's popular, they'll never win trust back.

longfingernails · 17/01/2012 16:49

The problem with all your ideas (all good ideas) is that they are conservative ones, not socialist ones.

  1. Do you remember the Enterprise Zones of the 80s? This is essentially exactly that idea.
  1. Labour is the party of diversity co-ordinators and non-jobs. Red Ed doesn't exactly strike me as the triangulating type.
  1. Simplifying taxes has (essentially) been a right-wing notion over the various decades - the left has invented complicated schemes like tax credits, national insurance, etc.
  1. This is a old liberal/conservative idea, and one that is essentially being put into practice with the £10000 personal allowance, funded in part by scrapping various benefits.

I agree that the way for Labour to get into power is to be a centrist party again, but you forget: the Labour party is now a party which boos Tony Blair, its 3 time election winner, at conference.

slug · 17/01/2012 16:43

I think all Labour really need to do is start looking like something other than Tory lite.

Swipe left for the next trending thread