How can labor revive itself
Digest opened free editor
Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Since reaching power, the most successful thing is a deficit. The feeling of despair has spread to companies, to families, to the Parliamentary Labor Party and crossing.
It became common to talk about Sir Kerr Starmer after he was the “worst beginning” of any British Prime Minister. Given that he did not develop, in my knowledge, in confirmation with the leader of another country, as Anthony Aden was a year later in the office, or was forced from him after an economic disaster, as Liz Tros was a wide range of the mark.
It must also be remembered that after the catastrophic obsession with the Egyptian leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser ventured in a military adventure that broke the British force and prestige, the conservatives still win an increasing majority.
From stagnation to earthly collapse is the worn path. In 1966, Harold Wilson, whose government participates in many characteristics with Starmer, again won. As Margaret Thatcher did in 1983, which was a year later in his post, she was unpopular, her party behind the polls.
The following elections are not due until the summer of 2029. Starmer has great advantages on his political opponents: not the least of which is the fact that he has a greater ability to form events in his favor. It leads all possible alternatives on other parties about the issue of who makes the best prime minister. NiGEL FARAGE’s reform has yet to be 20 points or a kind of major election victories that are generally seen as a prerequisite for opposition parties to convert the survey in the middle of the period to a general victory in the elections.
People, whether inside or outside the Labor Party, should not be very hasty to declare this government dead and buried. Although British voters are more ready to shop, we have not yet ignored our remarkable tendency to adhere to the Devil we know.
Starmer can manage things, with this first difficult year forgetting. The difficult early years are the rule, not the exception, for British governments (partly because since 1929, no British government has left its position without colliding with it a kind of economic crisis).
But what they need to manage them inside Starmer is: Governments that turned things at first must admit that they were going badly. Tatcher slowly, but steadily abandoned the money after 1981 and the Jeffrey Haw budget. The David Cameron government slowed the pace of austerity as soon as Counselor George Osborne bend the opposition from inside and outside the coalition. All new ministers must learn in the job – but the learning curve in Starmer still looks amazingly horizontal.
This government stumbled from the failure to impose a means of fuel allowance in the winter – a benefit that went to the richest retirees, most of whom did not vote from work the last time, and they were not part of their way to Downing Street in the elections – to try to reduce payments to some disabled people in Britain, and many who voted the last time and who are supported to support them for the one. As is the case, the ministers are on their way to repeat the same mistake on the entitlements of the families who have large numbers of children, who, again, tend to vote on employment – and this policy that directly contradicts the party’s commitment to limit the poverty of children.
When it comes to economic growth, a central priority was said, the approach, with a phrase, was random. The Labor Party theory seems to be that if you make it more expensive to employ people, the most difficult to rent it from abroad, and more difficult to launch people, you will end up with a greater economic dynamic.
It seems that the party also believes that it would be the catastrophic to raise taxes on the owners of medium papers who have received significant tax cuts under Cameron, but this sophisticated complexity and higher taxes on the largest and owners of mobile devices will not have negative consequences.
As for the European Union, the consensus is that the best and most economical relationship coincides with the exact amount of proximity that the Labor Party voters 2024, given the scope of their views on Britain’s exit from the European Union, will tolerate without screaming.
What connects this unconscious soup together is that it is popular, or at least popular with workers ’voters. It may be clear that the party is already Mubarak, and that the road to economic revival in the United Kingdom is going through a mixture of politics only through the reality of workers’ voters like its voice. Then again, may not.
To change things, Starmer needs to start admitting what is happening. The negligence of the Labor Party deputies, who hear a little Downg Street or their prime minister, either in terms of personal immunity, but more importantly with regard to what the government’s strategy is already.and He created a comfortable category of legislators who are afraid to be of one character and loss of confidence in the strategy. They see that a mixture of popular tax increase, unwanted burdens and the narration of companies has affected growth, and that the party’s statement cannot be fulfilled on the general world of the world without breaking its pledges on at least one of the tax added tax, income tax or national insurance.
The needs and government of the Prime Minister, in terms of politics and political guidance, to clarify a clear idea of ​​how it reached 2029 in a country appropriate to combat the upcoming elections. The alternative is to continue as is the case now, with each budget as a station from the cross, each of which is painful and more difficult than the latter but without any possibility of a sudden resurrection in the end.
Post Comment