Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn: Alastair Meeks looks at the options for Labour’s ri
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn: Alastair Meeks looks at the options for Labour’s right wing
Jeremy Corbyn has come in for much criticism from the right of the Labour party since he took over as leader of the Labour party. He has been accused of indulging in fantasy politics, of deluding himself that the British public will ever elect a party on such a left wing prospectus and of surrounding himself with third raters whose only virtues are their impeccably socialist credentials. But t…
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
P.S. For any others who like me hadn't heard of 'belling the cat': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belling_the_cat
Considering his recent dismal track record, few are surprised Tristram Hunt is rumoured to be one of the first Labour MPs to face a deselection battle as part of the Corbynistas’ revenge against their Right-wing opponents......
Some years ago, he described the increase in the number of bookmakers’ shops under the last Labour government as ‘a scandal’......
As part of this admirable crusade, he also condemned bookmakers William Hill for avoiding tax by basing some of its operations in the tax haven of Gibraltar.
So why, according to the latest MPs register of interests, has Hunt accepted £40,000 from Peter Coates, chairman of Bet365, one of Britain’s most successful gambling companies?
Thanks to some of its subsidiaries being based in Gibraltar, the company legally avoided £5 million in corporation tax in 2011 and £8million in 2010.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3414952/ANDREW-PIERCE-Anti-gambling-Tristram-Hunt-s-40k-bookie.html
First-rate thread Mr Meeks, many thanks. - It is plain to see that Labour are in turmoil with no obvious way out of the mess they find themselves in. – Don’t recall seeing a party so fundamentally split since the Gang of Four upped sticks and left in 81.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3416056/Labour-MP-Simon-Danczuk-reported-fraudulent-expenses-claims.html
Eh ?
Not even in Heath's time did the Tories ever have a Chancellor who embarked upon wrecking the pension provisions of the middle classes as this Government is intent upon doing.
And this after Brown had raided the same private sector pension scheme members of tens of billions of pounds from the time of his very first budget.
Osborne will never be forgiven for this - if he can't get the country's borrowings under control as appears is the case, then he should do the fairest, most straightforward thing as past Chancellors have done and increase the rate of income tax, but it seems that no Chancellor dare go anywhere near that particular holy grail.
I would not think that a connection with the company would do Hunt any harm at all in Stoke. Indeed most likely it would be seen as local roots, historically a weak spot for Hunt.
The Labour centrists need to act soon, or their moment will be lost.
German commentariat now speculating how long has Merkel got. Regional elections in March a litmus test.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/tv-kritik/tv-kritik-hart-aber-fair-kein-scherbengericht-fuer-angela-merkel-14034490.html
Corbyn is safe until he decides to leave, unless of course the famously regicidal PLP decide to depose him in the same way they deposed Brown and Miliband before him. Oh...
Particularly on Tristram Hunt 'getting it'. He said shortly after the election that Labour needed to become much more comfortable with the idea of the nation state. Too bad Corbyn is furiously pedalling in the opposite direction.
What this boils down to is Labour centrists making (1) a positive Labour case for their politics - not unlike how Hilary did over the Syria vote, and, (2) showing leadership by fighting consistently and making a stand.
If they can inspire in a way that resonates with the public, and shows up in opinion polls, then maybe (just maybe) some of the membership will come to their senses.
Conversely, no-one votes for a cynical coward.
The deselections are clearly coming, the question is will the moderate MPs simply accept their fate or will they actually do anything about it?
(and BTW the only thing in your article I'd pick on is the comment about Tory wets - Dave is the queen of metrosexual, pantywaist, EU loving, socially liberal sponginess. He's no John Redwood. And he's firmly in power.)
The FT says
"The government’s case for reform is that the majority of pension tax relief — worth £21bn a year — currently goes to the most affluent in society.
The Pensions Policy Institute believes that 29 per cent of the relief goes to basic rate taxpayers, 56 per cent to higher rate taxpayers and 15 per cent to additional rate taxpayers. A single flat rate would be more “progressive”.
"High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/174d3822-bbad-11e5-bf7e-8a339b6f2164.html#ixzz3yKRQZjdn
Although scrapping the higher rate of pensions tax relief would impact traditional Tory supporters, Mr Osborne knows that they have nowhere else to go. Mr Corbyn’s Labour is hardly a more enticing prospect."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/174d3822-bbad-11e5-bf7e-8a339b6f2164.html#axzz3yKQGTyRr
I am not sure if deselections are quite the threat that some predict, apart from one or two like Danczuk. Labour moderates do need to do some cultivation of their members, but reconnecting with the grassroots is part of the rebuilding process.
I suspect that the political complexion of the Labour MPs in 2020 will be a little to the left of now, but the centre of gravity will still be well to the right of Corbyn.
We are having all the usual nonsense being trailed out about Osborne this morning but the fact remains that the deficit is now approaching 1/3 of what he inherited as a share of GDP. Much of that has come from tax increases such as VAT and some has come from the economic cycle but he has massively slowed the increase in public spending with brutal cuts in the unprotected areas. The fact that the job is not done and that "austerity" still has a long way to go is a major problem for the right wing of the Labour party.
Labour need to find a philosophy and purpose that is not linked to spending significant additional sums of public money. In my opinion the obvious answer is equality of opportunity. Educational performance in this country is shamefully correlated to economic status. That needs to change. The way that ZHC employees are treated is a disgrace. The defanging of the ET system with fees has greatly encouraged this abuse. Our banking sector remains too big to fail, uncompetitive and abuses the consumer.
Behind all this though is a bigger point. Labour used to have no problem with aspiration, achievement and success. Now there seems to be a hostility to such ideas and a desire to maintain the poor in their current circumstances by protecting their existing benefits, housing, entitlements etc even when they are trapping them in a life of poverty. If the Labour right can articulate the idea of a more egalitarian society which also celebrates success it could become a political force again.
Pension tax relief looks to be targetted, but should be part of a wider pensions review. Further disincentives to save are not needed!
Many people pay into personal pensions only at certain points of their lives. In a 40 year career they may well only pay in for a decade or two.
In their twenties and thirties most ABC1 people will be paying off student debt, and trying to afford a home and children. It is only when in their forties and fifties that they are likely to have the income and security to pay into a private pension. For most it is not a tax dodge, it is a part of the natural economic cycle over an earning life time. Most will have been basic rate taxpayers for the previous decades and will be again in retirement.
To point out the obvious: higher rate taxpayers pay more into their pensions because they are the ones who can afford to do so!
And COrbyn will still be there.
That becomes ever clearer, doesn't it? At the very top we have a very wet pair, beneath them increasingly we see a stratum of drones and careerists happy to spout whatever rubbish comes from above.
It is understood Mr Danczuk has not seen two of his children for several years Yet made expenses claims for them
He accused Ipsa's rules of being 'too vague' and out of keeping with modern parenting.
Methinks Danczuk is out of keeping with being MP for Rochdale soon but nothing would surprise me with him.
One day, the Conservatives will be out of power. They will need both donations, members and supporters to rebuild, pound the streets and make their case in the media and in the country to regain it.
They might find they have very few turning out for them.
An egalitarian state is about good education, good training, equality of opportunity and a tilt of the tiller against vested interest and inherited advantage. It is still needed.
Simon Danczuk @SimonDanczuk Jan 23
Good news: I've got a new iron! #heaven
Presumably not claimed on expenses?
I hasten to add that I doubt it will be the wealthiest Conservative supporters who have a problem with this. They were far more worried about things like the mansion tax.
It will be those who work hard, long hours with a lot of responsibility, and have made a lot of sacrifices along the way, to build a professional or business career that puts them in the 45-70k income bracket and are trying their best to provide for their retirement. They won't necessarily have many other assets apart from the family home and their pension pot.
Of course, they assiduously pay tax (and a lot of it) and are clearly politically expendable in the short-term, which is what makes them such a tempting target.
Cameron used to talk about standing by people who 'do the right thing'.
If that is so he should veto this.
Well there's a slippery concept
@davidtorrance: Although I still have a feeling we've heard all this before, there's (modest) evidence of a (modest) Tory revival: https://t.co/rL1lvbvaZY
I'm a bit perplexed at this part of the thread header.
Leaders need to be right for their time. We needed Thatcher in 1979. And I voted for her and On Your Bike Tebbit in the 80s.
Whatever the time, Corbyn isn't the answer.
Good piece, Mr. Meeks.
There are two bold options that the PLP could adopt. The first is to nominate someone (Benn, Cooper etc) from whom they would take their voting lead in Parliament. The second is to have a major split, forming the official Opposition if possible, or the second largest [opposition] party if not.
Ancient campaigns often started with a river crossing (rivers were convenient boundaries). Hannibal crossed the Ebro to start war with Rome. Alexander's first battle against the Persians was crossing the Granicus. And, most famously, Caesar crossed the Rubicon.
If Labour MPs are scared of getting their feet wet, they'll never take the fight to their adversary.
The Tory wets believed Thatcher would never win an election, and then that she would be a one term failure. If she had, they may very well have been right that the pendulum would swing back. As it happens, they were very wrong and it didn't. But it wasn't a totally ludicrous belief in the late 70s or early 80s recession, and it's a rather less ludicrous position for Labour moderates now.
IMHO, too many in Labour dislike their own side and look down on them/want to fix their vulgar ways. Tories smile on anyone who wants to get on.
7. The Left will not move against them.
The net thinking of Alastair's six points is that if they sit tight, the tide will turn and they can then catch it. They may not be in a position to do so. The membership has proven itself to be well to the left of the PLP. With boundary reviews meaning that many seats will have open selections, there'll be little need for overt deselections (though some may happen anyway); right wing MPs can be weeded out much more organically. And they will be unless something is done to stop them.
Increasing the 40% tax threshold by £10k will make anyone earning £50-100k £2k better off for example, maybe also a flat 30% relief on pension contributions will encourage saving further down the income scale - as govt will effectively top up by 10% any pension contributions by standard rate taxpayers.
In the elections this century, Labour has had two outright majorities, both far larger than the current Conservative one, the Conservatives have had one outright majority, and there's been a Hung Parliament.
Bleating about the system is pathetic.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/691897141200052224
The CDU/CSU still have leads (some very narrow, admittedly), in ten of the sixteen Lander.
Bluntly speaking, there is only a limited amount of money to go around. Higher rate pension tax relief is a huge amount of money. Those who are the best off should contribute. It will hit me personally quite badly (I only have a small pension as have been busy paying down my mortgages) but I don't see why I should get relief at 40% while Joe Bloggs only gets 20%.
Fairer and simpler to equalise the rate.
Edit: Seven.
I'm still chuckling at the previous thread where tribalists were arguing over Parkibson and comparing previous, similar scandals.
"Your adulterers are worse than ours", was the theme.
I contribute to one of these schemes because I have to.. It might buy me a cup of coffee in retirement,
This is what we've come to, grown men clogging up courts and costing us money over some ridiculous name calling. Jail them both for wasting police time.
Maybe the bookies are warming up for Australia v India later. No way I'm betting on that one!
Do you agree Mr Herdson?
I think it's got very little to do with the deficit and a lot to do with Osborne making a play for what he calls the centre ground.
He thinks that means progressive politics and redistribution.
Matthew Bailey
‘Labour’s Niagara’ – Opinion, Daily Express https://t.co/bfg4uaxygR
Regardless, I will move heaven and earth now to stop him becoming leader.
They don't want power, at least not on Blairite terms, which they see as a form of Toryism. And even Liz Kendall agrres with them!
AM and the few activists who agree with him would do better to leave the Party. Where he can go I've no idea.
This is the society useless politicians are creating, call someone a name and it goes to court, in primary school you went before the Head and were told to mind your manners.
The Magistrates didn't believe any of them:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12121233/Taxi-driver-accused-of-shouting-homophobic-abuse-at-Baron-Brian-Paddick-cleared-in-court.html
Chair of the bench Steve Roberts said: “We need to be sure you used threatening, abusive or insulting words with the intention of causing alarm or distress, and that these words did cause alarm or distress.
“We found many inconsistencies were found with all three witnesses.
“We could not be sure what words were used.
Why should you be double-taxed for deferring some of your income?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12119531/Doug-Richard-Ex-Dragons-Den-star-paid-girl-13-for-sex-court-hears.html
Of course, the Labour right might try to move anyway, and the English council elections may be poor as well - which would be harder to write off - but the Corbynites have their excuses ready.
The key election is London. If Khan loses then the electoral case against Corbyn is powerful; if he wins, losses elsewhere will be forgotten.