TO SAY that there is currently a breakdown of trust between politicians and the public is an understatement. It is the underlying theme of the expenses story that has dominated politics for the past few weeks. Although we can assume that Labour, as the governing party, will get more of the blame, the Tories are also suffering. The expenses revelations from the Conservative benches, with houses for ducks, chandeliers, moats to be cleared and moles in the lawn to be dealt with, revive images of the party that David Cameron has been seeking to bury since the day he became leader. It’s rather reminiscent of Night of the Living Dead.
Further, if the Tories are seen as no different from the general political class – that all politicians are alike and all are equally rotten – Cameron’s forward march may falter. But Labour supporters would have nothing to cheer about if the fallout from the expenses scandals means the Tories lose votes to the UK Independence Party or the British National Party. It would be more evidence that the political situation in Britain has the capacity to turn very unpleasant.
When social democratic parties seem to offer no hope to people, it can create a space for the far right. This is one of the many reasons why it is essential for Labour to regain the initiative. The party must demonstrate clearly that, under a Labour government and in contrast to the Tories, people will be
protected from the economic maelstrom by policies that safeguard job, homes, and savings. We need to send an unequivocal message that low- and middle-income households will not be hit harder than the richest.
Some of the Government’s steps have been in the right direction. The cut in VAT and the new top rate of income tax are both measures that take us some way towards a more progressive taxation system. However, the main form of the Government’s response to the financial crisis – bail-outs for the banks at way above the real cost, as opposed to nationalisations at the genuine price, which was really zero – have built national debt on a massive scale. The public fear that they will have to bear the cost of this in the form of higher taxes and worse public services.
The Government could make cuts that would not damage the quality of life in this country. We could reduce our defence spending to German levels, for example, or abandon the replacement of Trident. We should take control of the core of the banking sector at its actual worth, along with, where necessary, other key sectors of the economy – such as in construction – in order to revive investment and credit.
Trust has been a degraded commodity in British politics over the past few years and not just lately. This is because Parliament took decisions that there palpably wrong and which had horrendous consequences. The war in Iraq is the most obvious example. People expected much more lasting and real change under Labour. But this has not been not been delivered and they have been disappointed. There has been too little progress in building new affordable homes or with measures to stop manufacturing going to the wall. This has contributed to years of disaffection. No wonder people distrust politicians.
There is no clearer example of the divide between Labour and the public than over the plan to part-privatise the Royal Mail. As Communication Workers’ Union leader Billy Hayes argues, it is staggering that, at a time when the free market consensus is in tatters, we have banks nationalised but privatisation imposed on the Post Office. In fact, it is worse than that. For the most part, the banks have not been genuinely nationalised, but bailed out. There has been a huge transfer of public money to bankers and shareholders. Yet the Government is proceeding with plans to sell off part of the Royal Mail.
There is no great public support for this. The CWU points to opinion polls that say 75 per cent the population disagreed with privatisation, with one third strongly disagreeing. Nine out of 10 people opposed selling part of Royal Mail to a foreign postal operator.
Like the public-private partnership for the London Underground, the Government’s case for Royal Mail privatisation is flimsy. But it intends to press on anyway. It presents the Royal Mail as inefficient, but ignores the pricing regime under which it has to operate. Ministers seek to portray it as an out-of-date nationalised industry when its profits have just doubled to £321 million and when private mail operators such as TNT have seen their profits reduced.
Labour MPs – a much-criticised bunch at present – can do something to restore their relationship with the public in the coming weeks by rejecting privatisation of the Post Office. Even better, the Government could withdraw the whole proposal.
