London, On reflection

Suddenly, an election that really matters

“It doesn’t matter who you vote for, they’re all the same anyway.”

Until not so long ago, this exasperated complaint at the samey nature of political parties was all-too justified. It led at least in part to the Brexit vote – a vote to really upset the status quo in the most emphatic way possible. Outside of that, if the Tories and Labour were more or less indistinguishable (both committed to a lean state with many public services privatised, a low-tax economy, open-door immigration, the EU, social liberalism, a country in which the rich get ever richer and the less well-off ever more hopeless and frustrated), then what was the point of turning out on polling day?

vote_uk,jpg

Well, no-one can complain of this lack of alternatives now. On Thursday, 8 June, voters really are given a choice. It’s a choice between a more xenophobic and jingoistic version of Thatcherism than even the Iron Lady would have countenanced – a Tory government effectively taken over by the far-right fringe of UKIP-ideologues. In their political gameplan, everything is justified by Brexit (the Tories eagerly seizing on a mess they created – genius.) In this scenario, we give Theresa May Tudor-like royal powers to negotiate our very own affairs in secret, away from our prying eyes, allow a wholesale repeal of legislation and replacement of it by government, bypassing Parliament (if the EU had dared the same!) and suffer even more austerity, this time justified by the headwinds created by Brexit (“there is no magic money tree”, as Theresa May told the nurse in York who had the temerity, like Oliver Twist, to please have some more).

No hope then for our over-worked doctors, nurses and teachers, no succour for the NHS, certainly no £350 million a week – that much must be clear to any last voter by now. At the same time, a commitment to a hard Brexit which would irreversibly wreck the economy more than any loony-tunes Labour government ever could, making trade costly and bureaucratic, travel cumbersome, degrading UK higher education, damaging our start-up sector, making life more difficult for our farmers – the list goes on ad infinitum. All this wrapped up in a promise to bring down immigration which even some Tories argue will be hard to deliver, and which will further harm our economy (who will look after the sick in our hospitals, who will pick our strawberries if we deport foreign workers en masse – or simply turn them off so much they leave of their own accord?) At the same time, to compensate, the Tories propose even lower taxes for rich corporations and individual to compensate for the Brexit-mess they’ve created. And on the international stage, May will continue to hold hands with “America-first”, coal-burning, foreigner-bombing, corrupt Donald Trump – a lonely vassal of the deranged and fevered POTUS.

trump-may

On the other hand, Labour is for the first time in many years offering a true alternative to the status quo. Free from EU-rules, a Labour government would consider lowering VAT – the most regressive and unfair tax of them all, as it’s paid by the wealthy and the poor alike. It would freeze income tax and NI-contributions for most, while raising tax rates for the richest (who have enjoyed many years of tax cuts). It promises to end zero-hours contracts, regulate the gig economy, hire more police, end the freeze in public sector pay, re-nationalise the railways bit by bit, bring utilities into local public ownership (a model that works very well in the socialist utopia, Germany) and abolish tuition fee (remember a time when we took free education for granted? Overall, the country had less money then!). At the same time, Labour would allow all EU-citizens to stay in Europe and is realistic on immigration. On this sore point, Corbyn and his team bet on the idea that Brits don’t resent foreigners as long as they are not undercutting the local population, or using scarce public services. In ending the exploitation of foreign workers, British workers would enjoy once more a level playing field.

 

luxury apartment

Tory London: while ordinary people are being priced out of the capital,  luxury tower blocks are being marketed at international investors (they’re ugly, too).

The EU-referendum put the country at a historic crossroads. Until recently, it seemed as if we had made a choice and were therefore set on an inevitable onward course. Yes, the people had made  one decision that truly mattered – but now we could all go home: our job was merely to confirm Theresa May in office and let her get on with governing as she saw fit. The polls  looked as if docile Britons were about to do exactly that.

The election was to be a pure formality, a bit like Parliament triggering Article 50 by a vast majority. But as we approach polling day, everything has changed, and May’s coronation doesn’t seem so certain any more.

Instead, we could see the face of Britain change radically once more, harking back to the truly revolutionary governments of 1948 and 1979.

This time, it really does matter who you vote for.

Standard
On reflection

Jeremy Corbyn is a godsend to British politics

Peter Hain, Alistair Campbell, Tony Blair, Yvette Cooper… the list of Labour bigwigs jumping up and down hysterically warning of a Jeremy Corbyn victory in the Labour party leader election grows longer by the day. They say that a man who is winning, speaking to overflowing rallies, is an election loser. They say that a man who proposes an idea as novel as a quantitative easing for ordinary people peddles the politics of yesteryear. They say that new members entering the party to vote for Corbyn are mischief makers, to be weeded out and disqualified, when if the same new members had lent their force to the predictable three – Cooper, Burnham and Kendall – no-one would have questioned their motives. They say they are modernisers yet defend tooth and nail the status quo.

"It isn't fair", cries Tony Blair

“It isn’t fair”, cries Tony Blair

Jeremy Corbyn is a godsend to British politics. He’s an authentic anti-establishment figure, his age alone proof of a provenance untarnished by focus-group testing and marketeering. He can convincingly claim to speak for the working class and connect with blue Labour in a way the geeky Ed Miliband never could, winning these lost supporters back from UKIP and the Conservatives. He can take the wind out of the sails of the SNP and in doing so, save the United Kingdom. (Tony Blair warns of Labour being annihilated – what, if not annihilation, has been his party’s fate in Scotland, its one-time stronghold and Blair’s own native country?) He can offer a true opposition when more and more voters feel that all parties are the same, that politics has become meaningless because the outcome is always the same, regardless of whose box we tick on the ballot paper. He can even offer an alternative vision of the EU and Britain’s place in it, just when Cameron is putting the terms of our membership up for debate.

The process of electing a new leader was designed to weaken the trade unions, who – it was felt – had tipped the scales in favour of the wrong Miliband, Ed (the right Miliband, seeing his career was going nowhere, left his constituents in South Shields to their fate to take on a £300,000-a-year job at a New York charity). Perhaps the idea was that more mainstream participants in the process would make it that much harder for a candidate of the left to become leader. And yet, it appears the opposite is happening. Like every other manipulative tactic of the past, the move has backfired – one need only think of devolution, which, instead of producing a permanent Labour government in Edinburgh, has resulted in the Nationalists running the show, and the direct election of the London mayor which, incredibly, handed the capital to a posh Tory.

Time and time again, Labour modernisers have given us more democracy only to be sent packing as a result. One almost feels sorry for them.

Standard