Labour

Single issue ‘Parties’ are bad for politics

Green UKIP

With the next General Election less than 100 days away, it seems highly likely that we are heading for another ‘hung parliament’ and coalition government. The big question is, how will that coalition be made up – and what impact will the so-called ‘fringe’ parties have on the result?

It seems to me that all manner of multi-party agreements could come into play post-election. Labour could sign up to a deal with the Greens and the SNP; the Tories could go with the Unionists of Ireland, the Lib Dems and maybe even UKIP; or we could end up with the largest party, probably the Conservatives, going it alone for a few months before calling another General Election to try and get a conclusive result.

The uncertainty surrounding May’s poll is due to several things, among them the less than inspirational leadership we are being offered by the leaders of the three mainstream parties; but largely it is because of the surge in support the minor political forces have enjoyed in recent months.

It sounds somewhat patronising, and perhaps even a little politically snobbish to say this, but those who are seriously thinking of putting their ‘X’ in the box marked Green, UKIP, Independent or, to a lesser extent, SNP, are clearly not too concerned about the detail and range of policies that are required for government.

These fringe parties are basically single issue campaigners who have decided that forming a ‘political party’ gives them more legitimacy and a bigger voice than by simply sticking to what they actually are – protest groups.

The Greens are anti-nuclear; anti-fracking and, apparently, anti-enterprise. They have no clue about economic policy, defence or indeed a whole manner of things that should concentrate the minds of any political party standing for election. Do those who are planning to vote Green really appreciate that they want to abolish the army in favour of ‘civil defence’ volunteers? Or that they wish to kick the Queen out of Buckingham Palace and stick her and the Corgi’s in a council house?

Outside of immigration and their anti-EU agenda, have UKIP got any policies that bear scrutiny? Certainly on both the NHS and economic policy they have been found desperately short of ideas and credibility.

And, outside of using the proceeds of North Sea oil to prop up some kind of Scottish Utopia, how are the SNP proposing to govern their nation if they do ever get full blown UDI? With oil prices now plummeting, you can only see their mismanagement of public services getting worse if they were to be given the powers they crave.

Single issue pressure groups should be just that – or we end up in the dangerous position that we now find ourselves, with a turned off electorate choosing to back parties with one idea rather than a Manifesto to govern.

Get Ready for a Deluge of ‘Royal’ Visits

Sexy Politics

Lancashire will be a key area in deciding who will form the next government, with a number of marginal seats to be fought in the county at the polls in May.

At this moment in time all the polling evidence suggests that we are heading for another ‘hung’ parliament with none of the two ‘big’ parties pulling up any trees at the moment; the Tories obsessed once again with the issue of Europe, and Labour being led by a man that is clearly struggling to impose himself in the minds of the electorate as a potential Prime Minister.

For the Liberal Democrats the Coalition agreement has proved to be an unmitigated disaster, and for all their protestations about their input into policies surrounding the low paid, the green agenda and, indeed, the economy, the perception voters have of Nick Clegg & Co is of a party that sold its soul for a whiff of the red ministerial boxes. The tuition fees U-turn effectively killed them.

Labour had hoped to pick up the majority of Lib Dem discontents, and win the election by simply adopting a more traditional social democrat, safety first approach that would enable them to hit the 35% of the vote mark, which would give them a small, but workable, majority.

They had not factored in the backlash to traditional politics that we are witnessing at the moment, nor the fact that they are likely to lose a significant number of ‘safe’ seats themselves north of the border to the Scottish Nationalists.

The Tories will lose votes, if not seats, to UKIP, that may lead to them missing out on some of their target constituencies, and who knows how other minority parties like the Greens and even Plaid Cymru will perform.

It all means that just seven months out from the election, we really have no clue as to the type of government we will have in place next year. The lack of genuine, consistent leadership from either Cameron or Miliband makes it a wide open race, and that means that every vote will count, particularly in this part of the world. Expect a series of high profile visits from Ministers and Shadow Ministers over the next few months – and then sit back and watch as Alex Salmond becomes the Deputy Prime Minister in the next Coalition that is cobbled together post May.

What A Farce!

hls

Downtown Liverpool has been a long time campaigner for a Liverpool city region Combined Authority.

It is a model that has worked and served Greater Manchester well for several years now, and the opportunity and potential that comes with a more collaborative approach between the six local councils in this part of the North West is easy to see.

However, our politicians have a knack of shooting the region in the foot, looking gift horses in the mouth and grasping defeat from the jaws of victory that is as uncanny as it is tragic.

The latest gaff, apparently courtesy of local districts who did not wish to see the word Liverpool dominate the title of the new local government body, comes with the proposed name which is, wait for it, ‘The Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral Combined Authority.’ That trip’s of the tongue easily doesn’t it?

Imagine calling the Downtown office and being met with ‘Hello, Downtown Liverpool, Lancashire, Manchester and Leeds in Business’!

The suggested name is nonsense but it is what this says about the reality of genuine collaboration amongst our local government representatives that is of most concern. If they can’t come up with an agreement on a sensible name for an organisation, what chance is there of them producing a coherent economic strategy?

For this reason I am urging Liverpool’s Mayor Joe Anderson to walk away from a body that at best will be a talk shop and at worse could do serious damage to the city’s future regeneration and economic growth.

Will the city Mayor be expected to continually placate and negotiate with those who actually believe that their districts are as big a brand as Liverpool? Would there need to be a ‘redistribution’ of opportunities that emerge via inward investment activity and marketing and promotion? Can Joe really be expected to dilute a Liverpool brand which has been in the ascendency now for over a decade? I simply ask Joe this question – do you think you could sign up to this backward looking agenda?

Parochial politicians and council officials may try to hide behind Eric Pickles and government ministers for the botched name fiasco. They are not being honest with us. Our Whitehall sources have confirmed that heavy private lobbying has taken place to abandon the publicly agreed name of the ‘Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’ to the humdinger we have been saddled with. Worse, political leaders are working behind the scenes to unseat Joe Anderson as the chair of this organisation.

The local daftness aside, it is equally contemptible for the government to propose this bizarre name for what they presumably want to see as a serious policy making body for the city region. It may amuse Tory and Liberal Democrat ministers to see Labour council leaders scrap like rats in a sack, but they ought to care more about the credibility of Liverpool and the wider region.

If it wasn’t so serious, and embarrassing, it might be funny. Business leaders are fed up with this nonsense. We need to demand maturity and vision from our political masters – nationally and locally!

Labour’s 50% Gamble

Labour

Depending on your politics and point of view a 50% tax rate for those earning more than £150,000 per year may seem fair.

However, there is absolutely no economic sense in taxing the highest earners at this level as it leads to a fall rather than an increase in the tax take for the exchequer.

How can this be so? Well, at 45p in the pound a successful business owner or entrepreneur may wince a little, but psychologically they will live with it.

Once you tell someone you want half of their income, it is of little surprise that they start to aggressively investigate the many loopholes that exist to stop HMRC getting their mitts on their hard earned cash.

The other problem with the 50p rate though is that is does cap aspiration and ambition; it signals a culture of envy rather than enterprise; and most worryingly it prevents business owners from investing in growing their companies. What is the point of adding £500K to your bottom line if the return you get is likely to be less than 10% of that? It is a risk that is not worth taking.

That is why I think that Ed Balls announcement that a Labour government would re-introduce the 50p rate is wrong, and more ‘gesture politics’ than economically savvy.

Labour believes that the majority of us who can only dream of a salary of 150K support the measure and will vote accordingly.

I think it will enable the Tories to paint Labour as anti ambition, anti business and as the party of taxation. It was a road tried and tested by Neil Kinnock and John Smith in 1992, much to John Major’s delight.

It didn’t work for Labour then, and although scandals with banks and our big financial institutions means we are in a different place today, I doubt if it will work in eighteen months time when the country goes to the polls again.

Nonetheless, the battle lines have been drawn and it will be interesting to see if Cameron and Osborne take a gamble of their own by announcing a further cut in top rate tax to 40p; and how shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna convinces business leaders that Labour support his ‘British Dream’.

CCG condemns Miliband’s HS2 negativity

HS2

The Core Cities Group (CCG) fired a major warning shot across Labour leader, Ed Miliband’s bow this week about his party’s increasing negativity towards HS2. The threat of “open warfare” came from the Labour chiefs of its members, which includes Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Sheffield and Leeds.

What has become clear during my many conversations in Leeds is just how important big infrastructure schemes like HS2 are to the private sector in the city – it is the number one priority.

There is a real strength of feeling that we cannot allow this, and projects like NGT and the Northern Hub, to be hijacked by political wavering.

So it comes as a surprise that there are Leeds MPs and councillors quietly doing exactly that, willing to jeopardise the future prosperity of their city, seemingly  in favour of chasing the ‘not in my back yard’ vote.

If Leeds is going to take advantage of its current position as an economic success then only a concerted and cross-party effort to apply pressure on the Government will see it win investment in these and future projects, rather than chasing crumbs from the Westminster table.

Remember, there remain question marks over the ability of Leeds to deliver major infrastructure projects, in the same way that London was questioned about its ability to deliver the Olympics. Whilst Trinity and the Arena have shown ambition, it is the HS2s and NGTs of this world that show the commitment and determination to get things done.

If Leeds finds itself in another five years without significant progress on HS2 and an integrated transport system (the only major UK city without one) then the finger of blame will rightfully fall on the councillors and MPs who fiddled whilst the future prosperity of Leeds went up in smoke.