B
Black Swan
I'm not always on the same page as George but he's got this bang on;
Let us begin where my colleagues claim the party's record is strongest: poverty and inequality. During the first seven years of the Labour government there was real progress on poverty. But from 2004 onwards the trend went into reverse. In the three years to 2007-08 the number of people in households living on less than 60% of median income rose by 1.3 million – producing a total better than in 1997, but worse than in 1989. This was before the recession hit, so God knows what the next set of figures will show.
The number of people in extreme poverty (living on less than 40% of median income) never substantially fell: it held steady through the first eight years of Labour government, then rose. There are now 700,000 more people in this condition than when Labour took office, and more than at any point since records began. The average real incomes of the poorest tenth declined by 2% in the 10 years to 2007-08. These figures, again, predate the recession.
The rich, on the other hand, have seldom done better. Of the extra income enjoyed by British households over the Labour years, 40% has accrued to the richest 10% (all references are on my website). The richest 1%, according to Injustice, Danny Dorling's new book, have captured a higher share of national income than at any time since the early 1930s. Inequality in the United Kingdom is now higher than at any point since consistent records began, in 1979. I feel that needs repeating. After 13 years of Labour government, the UK has higher levels of inequality than after 18 years of Tory government.
Why has this happened? Partly because Labour has shifted taxation from the rich to the poor. It cut corporation tax from 33% to 28% and capital gains tax from 40% to 18%. It introduced an entrepreneurs' relief scheme, taxing the first £2m of capital gains at only 10%. It raised the inheritance tax threshold for couples from £300,000 to £600,000.
Yes, the government has introduced and strengthened the minimum wage, and this is real progress. But it has also blocked employment rights for temporary and agency workers and preserved the opt-out clause in the EU's working time directive. The old workers' party has switched allegiance to the bosses, handing key positions to corporate executives and private equity tycoons, even appointing Digby Jones, the neanderthal former head of the CBI, a minister of the crown. It reduced workplace inspections (causing a rise in the number of deaths at work), dropped the requirement that meetings between ministers and corporate lobbyists must be recorded, and stopped the corruption case against BAE.
Having promised to scrap it when in opposition, it has extended the private finance initiative into sectors the Tories didn't dare to touch. Labour left sweeteners in PFI contracts for corporations to find, rigged the figures to make it look as if the scheme delivered value for money, then had to bail out the private operators when it began to collapse. The party also broke its promises to renationalise the railways and take private prisons back into public ownership: the UK now has a higher proportion of its prisoners in corporate jails than the United States.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/03/parasite-new-labour-fear-hope
Let us begin where my colleagues claim the party's record is strongest: poverty and inequality. During the first seven years of the Labour government there was real progress on poverty. But from 2004 onwards the trend went into reverse. In the three years to 2007-08 the number of people in households living on less than 60% of median income rose by 1.3 million – producing a total better than in 1997, but worse than in 1989. This was before the recession hit, so God knows what the next set of figures will show.
The number of people in extreme poverty (living on less than 40% of median income) never substantially fell: it held steady through the first eight years of Labour government, then rose. There are now 700,000 more people in this condition than when Labour took office, and more than at any point since records began. The average real incomes of the poorest tenth declined by 2% in the 10 years to 2007-08. These figures, again, predate the recession.
The rich, on the other hand, have seldom done better. Of the extra income enjoyed by British households over the Labour years, 40% has accrued to the richest 10% (all references are on my website). The richest 1%, according to Injustice, Danny Dorling's new book, have captured a higher share of national income than at any time since the early 1930s. Inequality in the United Kingdom is now higher than at any point since consistent records began, in 1979. I feel that needs repeating. After 13 years of Labour government, the UK has higher levels of inequality than after 18 years of Tory government.
Why has this happened? Partly because Labour has shifted taxation from the rich to the poor. It cut corporation tax from 33% to 28% and capital gains tax from 40% to 18%. It introduced an entrepreneurs' relief scheme, taxing the first £2m of capital gains at only 10%. It raised the inheritance tax threshold for couples from £300,000 to £600,000.
Yes, the government has introduced and strengthened the minimum wage, and this is real progress. But it has also blocked employment rights for temporary and agency workers and preserved the opt-out clause in the EU's working time directive. The old workers' party has switched allegiance to the bosses, handing key positions to corporate executives and private equity tycoons, even appointing Digby Jones, the neanderthal former head of the CBI, a minister of the crown. It reduced workplace inspections (causing a rise in the number of deaths at work), dropped the requirement that meetings between ministers and corporate lobbyists must be recorded, and stopped the corruption case against BAE.
Having promised to scrap it when in opposition, it has extended the private finance initiative into sectors the Tories didn't dare to touch. Labour left sweeteners in PFI contracts for corporations to find, rigged the figures to make it look as if the scheme delivered value for money, then had to bail out the private operators when it began to collapse. The party also broke its promises to renationalise the railways and take private prisons back into public ownership: the UK now has a higher proportion of its prisoners in corporate jails than the United States.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/03/parasite-new-labour-fear-hope
