Rolling coverage of all the day's political developments as they happen
More on Miliband v Mandelson. Reading the Press Association report, I see that Ed Miliband took aim at another famous Mandelson statement when he was taking questions after his speech today.
I don't think we can be intensely relaxed about the filthy rich getting richer, as [Mandelson] put it, if we are seeing people's living standards squeezed.
Miliband also said that he did not want to "get into an argie bargie" with the peer.
He's absolutely entitled to his views, he did great things for our party and he's got interesting things to say. I don't always agree with them.
The Electoral Commission has published a report on campaign spending in the 2010 general election (pdf). It says that 43 parties spent a total of �31.4m during the campaign. The Conservatives spent 53% of the entire amount spent by parties at a national level, Labour 35% and the Lib Dems 15%. Total campaign expenditure was �10.8m lower than in 2005. The news release is here.
My colleague Tom Clark was at the Ed Miliband speech. He's just put a post on Twitter saying the best line came when Miliband was asked about Lord Mandelson. "These days he's a writer, not a quitter," said Miliband, parodying the line Mandelson famously used in a rather over-the-top election night speech in Hartlepool in 2001 and making the point that Mandelson's recent comments about Miliband are related to the fact that he's got a book to flog.
Here's a lunchtime summary.
? Ed Miliband has said that Labour did not do enough to reduce inequality. In a speech to the Resolution Foundation, he said that rising inequality over the last 30 years had created a "cost of living crisis" that meant people on low and middle incomes were struggling to get by. "We were wrong not to focus more on the type of economy we were building and what that meant for the widening gulf between those at the very top and the rest," he said. Answering questions after his speech, he also said that Labour had underestimated the number of migrants who would come to Britain and that immigration had had an impact on wage levels. "We've got to look at the interaction of migration with, for example, flexible labour markets, because when you have the interaction of Eastern European migration and flexible labour markets there was pressure created on people's wages," he said. "We were certainly wrong about the number of people who were going to come in, make no bones about it, because I think we underestimated significantly the number of people who were going to come in from Eastern Europe." (See 12.25pm.)
? William Hague, the foreign secretary, has warned Colonel Gaddafi's supporters that they will face a "day of reckoning" if they use violence to defend the Libyan dictatorship. He delivered his message, aimed at members of the Libyan security forces, at a meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva.
Today we have signalled that crimes will not be condoned, will not go unpunished and will not be forgotten. This is a warning to anyone contemplating the abuse of human rights in Libya or any other country - Stay your hand. There will be a day of reckoning and the reach of international justice can be long.
Hague also urged other countries to join Britain in backing a resolution, being debated by the UN General Assembly in New York tomorrow, which would make Libya the first nation ever to be suspended from membership of the Human Rights Council.
? Downing Street has said that there are just "a handful" of Britons left in Libya who are still trying to get out. David Cameron will update MPs on the situation in a Commons statement at 3.30pm.
? Philip Hammond, the transport secretary, has launched a consultation on his plans for a new high-speed rail network. Describing it as one of the biggest public consultations ever undertaken, he said: "We must invest in Britain's future. High speed rail offers us a once-in-a-generation opportunity to transform the way we travel in the 21st century and would help us build a modern economy fit for the future." (See 11.11am and 11.25am.)
I've just read the full text of Ed Miliband's speech at the commission on living standards launch - and it's more substantial than the previews (see 9.40am) suggested. Lord Mandelson has been complaining about Miliband not having a vision. Today Miliband produced one - and it seems to involve trying to reverse 30 years of growing inequality. What makes this bold is the implicit suggestion that Labour failed in this regard (although Miliband does credit Labour with doing a huge amount for the low paid).
Here are the main points.
? Miliband says inequality has grown under the Tories and Labour over the last 30 years.
Since the late 1970s wages have grown almost twice as fast for the top 10% as they have for those in the middle.
Since 1979, 22p of every extra pound earned has gone into the pockets of the best paid 1%.
This tiny fraction of the workforce now takes home more than 14% of all earnings.
Our economy has become progressively less fair and the losers have been those on middle and low incomes.
Now of course wealth creation, with the dynamism and jobs it brings, is the prerequisite of a successful economy.
But ordinary families in Britain are being increasingly locked out of the benefits of economic growth.
? He says growing inequality has created a "cost of living crisis". He describes this as "a quiet crisis that is unfolding day-by-day in kitchens and living rooms in every town, village and city up and down this country".
? He suggests this inequality contributed to the financial crisis. "Because wages weren't keeping up with the pressures on families too many were forced to borrow to finance their living standards," he says. This fed the demand for cheap credit and increased instability in the economy, he argues.
(I'm not sure that this argument is particularly sound - inequality doesn't always lead to banks lending recklessly; I thought people borrowed too much because cheap credit was available - but Miliband does make the point that "huge irresponsibility in the banking sector" was the main cause of the crash.)
? He predicts that the "cost of living crisis" will continue after the economy recovers.
? He says Labour was "wrong not to focus more on the type of economy we were building and what that meant for the widening gulf between those at the very top and the rest."
This is interesting because the government and Labour have both talked about the need to rebalance the economy. When David Cameron talks about rebalancing, he seems to mean more industry. Miliband is making it clear that, when he talks about rebalancing, he means more fairness.
? He suggests he would like to use tax incentives to reward firms that pay the living wage (currently �7.85 an hour in London).
We need to work with business to see how we can improve living standards while maintaining levels of employment and competitiveness. That's one reason why I have proposed we look at the potential for tax incentives to reward the adoption of the living wage: supporting higher skill, higher productivity, higher growth companies.
? He suggests he would like to do more to reward firms that train their employees.
It also means looking again at how investment in skills and technology can drive productivity growth, particularly in historically low-skill sectors of our economy. The scale of the challenge is this: eight in ten German retail employees have completed vocational qualifications lasting two-to-three years and are more likely to progress to managerial careers; whereas only three in ten of their British counterparts are trained at the equivalent level.
? He says "fairness is not just financial". He says he wants people to have "a better future in terms of working hours" as well as in terms of pay.
You can read all today's Guardian politics stories here. And all the politics stories filed yesterday, including some in today's paper, are here.
As for the rest of the papers, here are some articles I found interesting.
? David Bennett, who as head of Monitor is going to be in charge of regulating the use of private providers in the NHS, tells the Financial Times in an interview (subscription) that competition on price should be introduced carefully, but not ruled out as Labour want.
The NHS bill ... gives the new regulator the power to set "maximum" prices ? implying that providers could undercut that, leading to price competition.
A series of health economists has warned that decision could mean a "race to the bottom" on price that would damage quality.
Mr Bennett acknowledges the possibility. "Especially in the early stages, competition will be on quality not on price," he says. "Because in a world where we cannot easily measure quality, if you allow price competition there is a very real risk that quality will fall. And there is even evidence that happens. But you can see it being used for simpler procedures where you can measure quality well. It will be very limited at first, and it will appear only slowly."
Mr Bennett was speaking just before Labour, last week, said it would seek to amend the NHS bill to outlaw price competition. He said: "I would not want to see price competition ruled out. So long as quality is assured, price competition is a way [to drive] productivity improvement."
Given NHS budget pressure, there needs to be improved productivity. To rule price competition out would be neither "necessary nor sensible", he said.
? Shirley Williams in the Times (paywall) says she is opposed to the government's NHS reforms.
Underlying the debate about health is another about values. For some of us, health care is a public service, strengthened by partnership and co-operation, the model in most Western European countries. For others, it is a market in which price determines quality, the US pattern. A June 2010 study of 11 health systems by the US-based Commonwealth Fund said of the US system: "Compared with ... Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, the US system ranks last or next to last on five dimensions ... quality, access, efficiency, equity and healthy lives." The NHS was the second least expensive per person after New Zealand, and came first on effective care, efficiency and cost-related access, and second on equity and in the overall ranking. Why we should dismember this remarkably successful public service for an untried and disruptive reorganisation amazes me. I remain unconvinced.
? James Kirkup in the Daily Telegraph says David Cameron and William Hague are unhappy with the way Liam Fox has been talking up Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Sources said Mr Cameron was worried that high-profile warnings about the Iranian nuclear programme could strengthen the domestic position of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime by lending it credibility.
Mr Cameron is understood to have asked officials to create a new strategy for statements on Iran, which will be seen as a rebuke to Dr Fox, the Government's most vocal critic of the country. Dr Fox told MPs at the end of last month that the West should plan on the basis that Tehran's weapons programme could be viable as soon as next year.
Officials said intelligence analysts did not support the claim. A senior diplomatic source told The Daily Telegraph that the Government's assessment was that the Iranians were still four years away from being able to construct a working nuclear device. Dr Fox's claim in the Commons was not approved by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
? Tony Blair tells the Times in an interview (paywall) that he spoke to Colonel Gaddafi twice on Friday and urged him to stand down.
I am not going to say any more than this ? that what I asked him to do is consistent with the message from the international community and his message was the message he has given publicly. He was in denial that these things are going on.
There is now one major strategic objective and the rest is a question of tactical decisions. The strategic objective is that there is a change in leadership in Libya with the minimum further bloodshed. Far too many people have died; there has been far too much violence.
? Boris Johnson in the Daily Telegraph says that he is opposed to the alternative vote - even though it is similar to the system used to elect him as London mayor.
Nick Clegg himself was right to oppose AV before the election, and he should stick to his guns. First-past-the-post has served this country well, and served dozens of other countries well. We would be mad to go to a great deal of trouble and expense to adopt a system that is less fair than the one we have.
? Mary Ann Sieghart in the Independent says quotas work.
When I started covering politics in the mid-1980s, that world was almost entirely male. I can pinpoint the year ? 1993 ? when I first had to queue for the loo at a Labour Party conference. That was because, for the first time, trade unions whose membership was, say, 60 per cent female had to make sure that 60 per cent of their conference delegates were women too. And constituency parties were asked to send one man and one woman.
Do you know how to recognise the signs of a stroke? The Department for Health is spending �740,000 on a campaign to tell you what they are. "The faster a stroke patient receives treatment, the better their chances are of surviving and reducing long-term disability," says Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, who had a stroke himself at the age of 35.
Labour wants HS2 to extend to Leeds and Manchester. Here's a statement from Maria Eagle, the shadow transport secretary.
A national high speed network has the potential to bring our major cities closer together, boosting investment and economic growth in the north of England. That's why it was Labour that set out plans for a high speed line from London to Birmingham but importantly also on to Leeds and Manchester.
The Tory-led government is only planning to take powers to construct the line as far as Birmingham which casts real doubt on their long term commitment to delivering high speed rail in the north. They should think again and ensure the whole route is included in the forthcoming legislation.
Philip Hammond, the transport secretary, has launched the consultation on high-speed rail. You can find his written ministerial statement here, his press notice here and full details about the consultation process, including the HS2 "roadshows", here. Hammond claims HS2 could be as important as the arrival of rail travel in the 19th century.
I believe that a national high speed rail network from London to Birmingham, with onward legs to Leeds and Manchester, could transform Britain's competitiveness as profoundly as the coming of the railways in the 19th century. It would reshape Britain's economic geography, helping bridge the north-south divide though massive improvements in journey times and better connections between cities - slashing almost an hour off the trip from London to Manchester.
Does Labour support the Big Society? It is still not entirely clear, although Ed Miliband has said in a speech last year that his party should "take that term 'Big Society' back off David Cameron". But two Labour MPs, Jon Cruddas and Tristram Hunt, have signed the backbench motion being debated today expressing unequivocal support for the idea. Tabled by the Tory MP Charlie Elphicke, and signed mostly by other Tory MPs, it says that "this House supports the Big Society, seeking stronger communities where power is decentralised and social action is encouraged."
In his BBC interview, Ed Miliband also played down the prospect of Labour coming out in favour of imposing the 50p income tax rate on those earning more than �100,000, instead of more than �150,000 (as now). During the leadership contest Ed Balls said he was in favour of bringing the threshold down to �100,000 and, when he was asked in an interview published last week if that was still his position, the shadow chancellor said: "Those are discussions that we still have to have ... It depends very much on where we are in the future." Miliband did not contradict him, but he did his best to suggest that lowering the threshold is not a Labour priority.
Our position on the 50p rate is very clear. We have said it should remain at �150,000 for this parliament. We will look at our tax policies for the next parliament nearer the general election.
As Patrick Wintour reported at the end of last week, Lord Mandelson has criticised Ed Miliband for not having a political vision. Here's how Mandelson put it:
Even allowing for the tactical choices [Miliband] had made in his bid to become leader, however, I was struck by the fact that he had given no strong clue during the campaign as to what alternative to New Labour he envisaged. He was quick to say what he was against: essentially, Tory policies and Tony's policies. But he rarely said what he was for, apart from a belief in greater social mobility and equal chances in life for the young, more strategic government intervention in the economy, and primacy for individual rights in counter-terrorist law.
Miliband was asked about this in his interview with the BBC this morning. When challenged to define his vision, he gave this answer.
My vision most of all is that I believe in equal chances for people. I care about the gap between rich and poor. I believe in stronger communities, because I think many of the things we value are under threat, like the NHS. And I believe in a new approach to politics that does mean reaching out and not engaging in some of the yah-boo politics of the past.
(This does not go much further than Milibandism as defined by Mandelson, although it is hard to set out a compelling vision in just four sentences.)
According to PoliticsHome, in the interview Miliband also appeared to dismiss Mandelson's suggestion that he should retain the "essence" of the New Labour project.
New Labour was right for its time but if you look at the conversation we've been having about low and middle income families and the way they struggled, including in part under the last Labour government towards the end, we need new ideas for the future. We need things that are actually building on things that Peter Mandelson did to build an industrial policy for our country so we have those high quality manufacturing jobs in our country. But you need to look at new approaches and that's what I'm trying to do as leader of the Labour party.
Downing Street have rung to confirm that David Cameron is making a statement on "Libya and the Middle East" in the Commons at 3.30pm.
Here are some excerpts from the speech Ed Miliband will give this morning at the launch of the commission on living standards. (See 8.40am.)
There is now a very real risk that we will see the longer-term pressure on wages for those on middle and low incomes colliding with rising prices, tax and benefit changes introduced by this Tory-led government and public service cuts which all hit families with children the hardest. My fear for those on middle and low incomes is that more and more families will face a cost of living crisis that will see them left behind, even as the economy eventually recovers.
The failure of the government is two-fold: they are not taking steps to build a different kind of economy, and they are hitting lower and middle-income families hardest in the way they are cutting the deficit.
While those at the top have done well, middle and low earners are no longer guaranteed the proceeds of growth. Our economy is increasingly unfair not just for those at the bottom but for many of those in the middle as well. The Conservative-led government is making the situation worse by cutting tax credits, raising VAT, hitting ordinary families hardest.
The task for the future is to build a different sort of economy; a high-quality economy with quality jobs and a better quality of life. That means good jobs at good wages for middle and lower income families. And a tax and benefit system that supports families with children, not one which is increasingly skewed against them, as we see under this government.
When the prospects for families with children look so bleak, that is why the British Promise in which we once believed the next generation would always do better than the last, is now under threat like never before.
The commission is being set up by the Resolution Foundation, a thinktank set up to develop policies to help LMEs. I knew about SMEs - small and medium-sized enterprises - but until today I had never heard of LMEs. According to the Resolution Foundation, they are low-to-middle earners.
My colleague Nicholas Watt has sent me a paragraph about David Cameron's Commons statement this afternoon. (See 8.58am.)
The prime minister is expected to admit that the government's response was initially hesitant. But he will say that the evacuation of British citizens has been a success so far, with an exemplary military operation to pluck oil workers from the desert. The prime minister will also say that Britain has led the way in isolating the Libyan regime by freezing the assets of the Gaddafi family and stripping its members of their diplomatic immunity.
Liam Fox, the defence secretary, has been giving interviews about Libya this morning. He told the Today programme that around 800 Britons have left the country in recent days. Asked about the prospect of further rescue missions, he played down their likelihood, but did not rule them out entirely.
If we find that there are UK citizens who cannot get out any other way, that is always an option, but remember we are also being helped by - and helping - our international allies ... As far as we know, we don't have large numbers of British citizens who want to get out. However, there are British citizens still there - some who will be working in the security industry, some who will be working in the oil industry - who will want to be there for reasons of employment, but circumstances change and we will want to constantly monitor those.
David Cameron is likely to make a statement about Libya, Foreign Office sources are saying. There's no confirmation from Downing Street yet. ("They're all in a meeting", I'm told.) So, Douglas Alexander has got his wish. And my first prediction of the morning has fallen flat. (See 8.40am.)
Ed Miliband has been on BBC Breakfast this morning defending Tony Blair's decision to engage with Colonel Gaddafi's Libyan regime.
I think, at that time, given that there seemed no prospect of a popular uprising in Libya, and given that there was a danger of Libya acquiring nuclear weapons, what Tony Blair did was get the weapons inspectors into Libya. I think, actually, that was the right thing to do. I think we must be careful about second-guessing that decision, but I think now a lot of the old assumptions about the Middle East and that region turn out to be misplaced, because there is clearly a popular will, which we see on the streets of Libya, for change.
Miliband said Gaddafi should go. The Labour leader also called for Britain's policy on arms exports to be reviewed.
We do need to look at the policy on arms sales. We do need to look at how it is implemented, because we don't want to see British arms being used for internal repression.
Libya was dominating the news when I left Westminster for a half-term holiday. And, as I arrive back, it's still at the top of the news bulletins. MPs are also back today after their mini-recess and, although Downing Street and the Foreign Office aren't confirming anything yet, I'll be amazed if we don't get an oral statement about the events in north Africa.
Yesterday Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, said David Cameron should come to the Commons this afternoon "not just to explain why the Foreign Office got its evacuation plan so badly wrong at the start but how Britain can be a leader and not a follower in the efforts to increase the pressure on Gaddafi to stand down". Cameron's unlikely to oblige himself, but we'll probably hear from the Foreign Office.
Otherwise, it's relatively quiet. Here are the items in the diary.
11am: Ed Miliband gives a speech about the "squeezed middle" at the launch of a commission on living standards by the Resolution Foundation thinktank. As Toby Helm reported in the Observer, the thinktank will say that on people on low to middle incomes are facing a "perfect economic storm" which is cutting their living standards and dramatically reducing their ability to buy their own homes.
2.30pm: Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: MPs debate the "big society" on a backbench motion.
At some point today Philip Hammond, the transport secretary, is launching the consultation on his plans for the high-speed rail project (HS2).
As usual, I'll be covering all the breaking political news, as well as looking at the papers and bringing you the best politics from the web. I'll post a lunchtime summary at around 1pm, and an afternoon one at around 4pm.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2011/feb/28/politics-live-blog
Dick Cheney Barack Obama George Soros Aung San Suu Kyi Queen Elizabeth II
No comments:
Post a Comment