How Brown can win

I'm driven day by day, further into disbelief, when I see that the government thinks by talking right, they'll win votes. Our core voters had never been seeked out for political retribution before, but with the 10p tax rate, they found a reason to think of Labour as bad as, if not worse than the Tories. Our supreme electoral coalition has disintegrated. The only way we will win, is by uniting our natural coalition, stretching from metropolitan liberals, to working class socialists.

Sweden has many lessons to offer. Their current PM, is who David Cameron bases himself on. The government were convinced that the Social Democrats loss in 2006 was a result of centre-left policies. But again, the parallels to Britain are striking. They wanted to kick out a leader who had been looking tired, and had been running the country for 10 years.

If Brown is radical, he can shake off this old, tired milieu that seems to haunt him. I said the other day that the time had come for a Labour revolution. Brown can lead it if he is successful. He needs a right-to-buy, or an NHS to get him to win.

He should stand on the doorstep of No. 10, and say, "I have persued the policies of Thatcherism, and they haven't helped the citizens of this country when they are already worrying about the economy. I am sorry for the 10p tax fiasco, and the failure to adequately tax the super rich. I am sorry for the civil service cuts that have lead to data losses, and the lack of financial regulations that have exacerbated fears about the economy.

I have to take tough decisions in this job. The era of cheap fuel is over. I know it's difficult to hear, but we do need higher taxes to make public services excellent. I, like the opposition leaders, have persued the same undiluted ideology for too long. It is only Labour though, that has the philosophy to correct many of these mistakes.

So I announce to you today, that I'm not going to cut fuel tax. But, what I will do, is use every penny, and I mean every penny, to subsidise public transport. I will use windfall taxes on polluting companies, to fund a new global project to find renewable sources, which I hope my colleagues across the world will join me in funding. I want a world without nuclear weapons, and we must engage other countries, to start the process of multilateral non-proliferation. I will stop the tax breaks on the super-rich, and will redistribute much of those taxes to the lower paid in our society. Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it is economically prudent. I will place more regulations on the financial markets, to stop exploitation of the British people.

I am not going to promise the British people the world. But it is my duty, in the name of social justice, to help them. We're all going to have to be a bit disappointed with pay checks, and prices, but I will do my best with the tax system, to ensure the well off aren't profiting at the expense of most Britons. We do need higher taxes, but it can get us excellent public services. I said in 2003, that Labour is "Best when we are boldest". Let Labour fulfil this promise."


Of course, perhaps he can say this in a less blunt way. But we need a radical path. The only way to lift the fake liberal mask covering David Cameron, is to persue a bold agenda. It has to be a bold progressive agenda. It seems to be universal childcare to me, that will guarantee Labour a couple of more terms, like right-to-buy guaranteed Thatcher 3 successive election victories.

Mostly though, it will not be radical policies, but the general state of affairs that will determine his legacy. I support the current polyclinic plan, but we shouldn't hear 'Reform. Reform. Reform.' constantly. The NHS has drastically improved, but the bread and butter issues of more doctors, more midwives, more nurses, more funding etc. should be the key battleground. I remember reading an article by Polly Toynbee (04/01/08) which showed the model of the Nottingham University Hospital Trust, a model I think we should follow, as it showed that it is not reshaping the beaurocracy, but the attention to the patients that has dramatically improved the hospital. The NHS defines my support for Labour, and I think the model of this hospital should be copied throughout the NHS.

On some levels, he needs radical new policies, and on other matters, he needs to stop pretending that his policies are radical. I think Brown can win, and we can cement Labour's place in government for a long time.



Display: Sort:

Re: How Brown can win (#1)

I really do just have a few suggestions of how to help lift the mask.

 

1) Brown must stop talking Burecratese [The Language of Government] and give answers to questions posed to him in a simple, easy to understand manner.

2) Get back to the "Father of the Nation" Figure we saw during Glasgow and the Foot n Mouth Outbreaks. [Or Foot in Mouth, whichever]

3) Engage with the electorate directly [As in out on the streets and talk] The Soapbox politics saved major in 1992 after all.

4) Explain to the electorate the public and private Brown.

Cameron has managed to do this fairly well, outlining his private and public lives, giving them a clear break, but then refering to them as part of his ability to get in touch with the electorate, he used this to great effect during the latest CameronDirect which is thoughly impressive.

Now, I'm not suggesting Brown go onto a similar tack as Cameron with some sort of "Down with Brown" event. I am suggesting he should try to find some way of putting across who he is. I mean, he should come out on some of these media circuits and say that he is a very private person, and so perhaps focuses too hard on the job when perhaps he needs to take a little step back.

The Early-Brown and the Brown seen at the party conference was impressive. The Brown we're seeing now is Dire.

As much as I want to see this government go up in smoke and see Mr C in Number 10, I don't think any man who holds this post should be consigned to the historical dustbin.

Not unless they really, really, really deserve it anyway.


Re: How Brown can win (#2)

"I know you won't like to hear this but all your problems have come about because we have not been bold enough in our taxation policies. Although we have increased taxes by a large amount, this is still not enough. My chancellor will announce in the next budget measures to have all salaries payed directly to the Treasury. Any money that is left will be distributed to you by means of a new 'adult allowance'. I have to warn you, though, that it is not likely that much will remain after we have provided basic food, housing, and transport for all. We will also need to allow for sufficient expenses for MPs whose workload will be so much greater as they introduce this final stage of the bold, progressive, perfect, socialist state."

Re: How Brown can win (#3)

If Brown were to say anything you suggest he should he would almost certainly lose the next election. Being bold does not entail shifting to the left, outrightly repudiating Thatcherism and reversing the language of New Labour back to Old Labour. That would lose Middle England and so would be political suicide as was the case in the 1980's.

The simple fact that people don't seem to recognise is that Brown can't win by virtue of his own self and personality - the voters have no empathy or enthusiasim for him. He is simply unfit to be PM - he is out of touch, indecisive and calculating. The sooner the election comes the better so he can be replaced by a second generation Blairite (e.g. Miliband) who will take the Blair project into its next phase rather than rewinding what has been achieved thus far.

Re: How Brown can win (#5)

The problem is that Labour sees Middle England as those paying 40% rates. The median income for the nation is £23,970. That is where Middle England is. Only 10% qualify for paying 40% rates. The country is far more left-wing than you think. The majority support redistribution of wealth, and the ability for workers to have strong rights in the workplace to determine working hours. The majority accept that drugs would be better being taxed and regulated, and accept prison doesn't help bring down crime. Even during the Thatcher years, the majority of the public voted for parties that supported tax and spend policies.

Listen, I'm not proposing to nationalise everything that moves here. Middle England is more angry about the super-rich. I don't think people support every public service reform, for the sake of reform. What I am proposing is genuine social democracy. Yes the right to buy is good, but it must be backed up by strong investment in social housing. Yes ending state monopolies is good, but I think it should've been done by proposing alternative forms of common ownership.

What I am hearing is that even during the fuel tax crisis, that the public wouldn't be as angry if they knew that the taxes were directly subsidising transport. I don't think someone on £25,000 cares if the tax burden is largely shifted to private equity, and the super-rich etc. In fact polls suggest that the majority would support this.

I know obviously he can't make the speech I proposed, but the government has sold a lie that you can have the Swedish model with US-style tax rates. What is fairer, is that the tax burden is higher on the rich than on the poor.

You know, there was a Labour party before the 1980's. I don't think people care if banks have utility style regulations, as was proposed by a report commissined by the treasury in 2000, if they know that it stops another Northern Rock, or reversing the complete deregulation of the mortgage market, which has caused this economic crisis. Why is anything to the left of New Labour seen as Bennite?

Re: How Brown can win (#6)

I don't accept that 'the country is far more left wing than you think'. If that is the case then how is a centre-right party (the Tories) consistently polling over 20% ahead of Labour in the opinion polls, and why did the country vote for the Tories four times in a row between 1979-1992, three of which were radically right wing under Thatcher? The electorate could have easily chosen Labour in 1987 or 1992 when it was more moderately left-wing than in 1979 or 1983, but not as right-wing as it was in 1997.

I don't think Middle England is those on £23kish per annum, but is the A/B/C1 middle class voters, e.g. floating voter teachers on around £34k a year who are therefore still in the basic rate tax band.

My main point is that the chief tenets of New Labour should not be abandoned if Labour is to succeed in the future - i.e. of aspiration and compassion, of economic efficiency and social justice. I admit that there is probably scope for raising taxes on the super-rich, but dumping the fundamentals of New Labour would end in political disaster.

PS I am actually a (centrist) Tory blogging here, just for your knowledge. I hope you don't mind if I contribute to the debate, as it is interesting to discuss political issues with people from other parties.

Re: How Brown can win (#8)

I explained why: Whatever the opinions of the Alliance were, they still had tax and spend policies, and were generally on the centre left. In every election that Thatcher was elected, the Labour+Liberal/SDP vote topped 50%.

Again, it's in the name. Middle England connotes those, well, in the middle, and the median income is hovering around the £24k mark. That is a constituency where people's social-democratic sides can be appealed to.


I sort of hover on the left of New Labour, along with the Polly Toynbees, the Johann Haris, the Jackie Ashleys, the Martin Kettles etc. New Labour was best when bold: the NHS tax, BoE independence, the windfall tax for the New Deal etc. In principle, I agree with many reformist policies. Public services should be decentralised, and I believe we need to lack at alternative forms of common ownership, such as breaking Royal Mail up into smaller co-operatives, or workers' and consumers' interest companies in water, and smaller companies with very strong consumer representation in transport. I believe in Fabian style socialisation of public services, but I don't believe that comes about by shifting beaurocracy into the hands of private companies: I believe it comes through more industrial democracy, and greater say over services for say, council house tenants.


Re: How Brown can win (#4)

Gordon is not Primeminister material. The reason he is not doing the sort of things suggested in the article is because they appear to be alien to his personality. If he does try doing them he does them badly.

Think back to the period where he was just becoming Primeminister and Blair was stepping down. Gordon gave media interviews but he always came across as "forcing himself" to be jovial. There was the famous interview where he said he listened to the Arctic Monkeys but then could not name an album, a track or hum a tune by them.

It seems to me that whilst Blair "didn't do God" (a blatant lie as shown by recent history), Gordon doesn't "do" strangers. A glaring hole in the amoury of any politician.

Re: How Brown can win (#7)

Brown could win by taking part in an election. But he was not elected leader against any candidates. He did not call a general election in 2007, at a time when he could have won. The Party as a whole are not to stand in the H&H by-election.

If Brown wants to be seen as a "clunking fist", a winner, a fighter, then he needs to participate in at least one public vote.