Ideas for the centre-left: a starter for six
There is a spectre haunting the centre-left in Britain. It comes from
commentators who are trying to establish a consensus that we have no new ideas.
May I begin the counter offensive with a starter for six?
Hardly a day
passes without voters seeing the giants of industry making more money by
risking our futures. The latest example comes from the insurance companies
flogging our pensions to one another. When I took out a policy with the Pru, I
expected the company to deliver on that policy. I bought the Pru guarantee. I
didn’t expect the company to bargain me away in an effort to boost short-term
profits.
And we’ve also
seen how Thames Water has shovelled money into the bank account of investors at
the expense of consumers, by setting up a separate company to carry out Thames
Water’s responsibilities to renew its capital base, but in a way that allows
huge dividends to be made rather than investing those payments.
Starter for one,
therefore, is to establish a public interest body that will intervene in the
market and prevent companies from exploiting consumers in this fashion. It will
have its work cut out, so it should be given powers that exceed those held by the
Competition and Markets Authority and the Serious Fraud Office. Getting tough
to protect the consumer against industrial giants is a number one priority.
Similar sweeping
action needs to be taken to protect the most weak and vulnerable sections of
Britain’s labour market.
The Taylor Review
gives us the beginnings of a layer of protection to be thrown around the most
vulnerable workers. A starting point for legislation must be the implementation
of the national minimum wage for all workers, defined on an hourly basis of
employment duties carried out, rather than a gross weekly sum which too many
companies in the gig economy use to steal from their workforce. The new
Director of Labour Market Enforcement, Sir David Metcalf, should have the Gangmasters
Licensing Authority, the Slavery Commissioner’s unit, and staff from HMRC
placed under his direction, to swoop on exploitative companies. Such a decisive
change should be made that those who know exactly what vulnerability means in
everyday life feel that they are at last being protected.
Brexit could
take up a whole shelf load of articles. It is crucial to show, however, that
each of the big themes are linked to each other.
We should forget
about timetables and deadlines and instead find ourselves a safe harbour from
which to negotiate. We then need to build up effective border controls. Behind
those border controls we need to ask employers to tell us which skills they
currently fill by using EU nationals. This data then must become the basis for
an effective skills policy, starting with offering boutique apprenticeships for
10 to 12 weeks which then earn graduates £150 a day or more in their second
year. There is already a £2.6bn fund being built up by the apprenticeship levy to
pay for this.
Also linked to
effective border controls must be a serious welfare reform programme which would
have been a nonsense with open borders. As borders are controlled and as skills
policy slowly builds up, so welfare claimants must be encouraged to take the
opportunities which require them to learn new skills and to work in many cases
full time.
A fourth pillar
in a transformative centre-left programme is to close the gap in the levels of
skills and development among children before they start school. On current
trends it will take 40 years to do so. This
class-based inequality, which grows during
school years, must be closed by an effective foundation years strategy. Sure Start
failed the very poorest parents who were dismissed as being ‘hard to reach’.
Money must be spent on more health visitors to engage such vulnerable parents regularly
on a one-to-one basis. The research presented in my report, The
Foundation years: preventing poor children becoming poor adults, shows
that class and income can be trumped by improving the mental health of
vulnerable mothers, establishing rich bonding between parents and their
children, and helping those families have fun at home which increases the children’s
whole skills base.
Next for the
centre-left is to take back control of our utilities. We should do this by
imposing a levy on the mega-profits of the utility companies. The monies raised
by that levy should be given over to a series of national mutuals. Those that
are running the industry will continue to do so, but the public interest will
be guarded by the mutuals and a share of profits increasingly being brought
back into investment and innovation.
In a similar
vein, we should move to phase out pension tax relief, especially from the very,
very wealthy, by establishing and paying this money into a national sovereign wealth
fund. Our petroleum tax was lost into current revenue. We urgently need to
build up a capital base of investments worldwide so we begin to re-establish a
growing stream of unearned income coming back to this country, for much-needed
investment in our own infrastructure and higher living standards.
That is my
starter for six: there will be a queue of MPs and others who can provide further
ideas for a programme for government.
Well done to the
Fabian Society for opening up this debate. We now need a Labour Party that not
only listens, but shows it is listening, by incorporating the best ideas into a
manifesto for the next election.
back