Is this how Labour can realistically tackle Reform UK? And will the government be too pig-headed to take the advice?

Is this how Labour can realistically tackle Reform UK?

Having discussed the Red Wall group’s pathetic wish for Labour to become more like its biggest rival in order to defeat it let’s look at other suggests and ask: is this how Labour can realistically tackle Reform UK?

Simon Wren-Lewis has useful ideas in his latest Mainly Macro article, starting with a suggestion that the UK should rejoin the EU’s customs union at once:

The actions of Donald Trump provide the perfect excuse to break Labour’s commitment not to do so. Joining the EU’s custom union modifies but does not reverse Brexit, despite what Brexiteers will claim. (Quite why Labour should allow those that lied their way to Brexit the ability to define what Brexit means is beyond me.) … It would bring economic and (with Trump) political benefits.

Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!

And it would seriously harm Reform UK’s credibility if economic growth followed such a move; Reform used to be called the Brexit Party, remember – its main policy position was that Brexit would improve UK citizens’ prosperity. Instead, it has harmed the economy by billions of pounds per year, knocking several percentage points off economic growth, and massively increased the bureaucratic burden on importers and exporters, in direct contradiction of what the Brexit snake-oil merchants promised.

The other main areas are public services and living standards. Professor Wren-Lewis suggests more tax increases (possibly on the super-rich, at last?) but, sadly, also suggests that Labour politicians have not “done the basic groundwork on what policies and actions it will need to take to achieve those goals”.

Once again, it seems Labour’s top table were more focused on grabbing power than on what they would do, once they had it:

Marginal improvements together with an absence of the chaos we saw under the Conservatives are good to have, but given the disaster in terms of living standards and public services that they bequeathed Labour those things alone might be enough to stop things getting worse, but they are not going to be enough to turn things around.

If I am right about this, it will not only have been a wasted opportunity, but it will also have a serious political cost. As in the US, the main political battle in the UK is between the conventional centre or centre/left and a populist very socially conservative right wing. The less living standards improve, and if improvements in public services are marginal, the more ammunition this gives to the populist right with their entirely bogus claims that these problems are just down to immigration.

When the government does nothing to contest these claims but appears to validate them, then (with a media biased towards populism) the only way to resist the appeal of these populist claims is to significantly improve public services and living standards.

But instead of taking such steps, Labour’s first moves have been to deliberately harm public services and crash living standards for huge numbers of people:

Reeves was given the perfect excuse to reverse the personal national insurance cuts when Labour came into office, but she chose to hit pensioners instead.

Ending the pensioners’ winter fuel allowance, whatever you might think of the economics, managed to be very unpopular with many voters without saving a great deal of money.

Supporting a third runway for Heathrow is bound to lose Labour some votes, with once again having little impact on economic growth.

The Chancellor has chosen an unpopular decision as a demonstration of her determination to achieve broader goals: manage the public finances with the cut to pensioners income and economic growth with the third runway.

The term ‘political judgement’ is overused, but these actions do look like a failure of political judgement.

Yes indeed – and these failures of political judgement could end up handing the nation to the fascists on a plate.


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Leave A Comment