Universalism

Universalism

In his latest blog, Phil BC shares that the Labour Government, articulated by Rachel Reeves, want to end the pensioners winter fuel benefit because they oppose universalism. But pensions have been earned through NI contributions. Dealing with wealth, or the wealthy earning subsidies, should be dealt with through income tax, removing the NI taper, inheritance tax, and a new wealth tax. Any such reform needs to take into account housing costs and cost of living. Why is it always the only just successful that get penalised by these schemes, such as occurs with the clawback of personal allowance and child benefit. The frightening thing from Phil’s report is that the state pension is a contributory universal benefit, although so was Unemployment Benefit which the Tories abolished and they also put National Insurance contributions into play. Are Labour really going to play with this and create a huge increment to the WASPI campaigners? Perhaps they think that pensioners vote Tory and die, but there are over 1 million workers over 60, most of whom will be planning when to stop and need some stability in their planning horizon. …

Starmer, Berlin, rejoineu and delay

Starmer, Berlin, rejoineu and delay

Even the press and some commentators noticed that Kier Starmer visited Berlin and repeated his Brexit red-lines and yet claimed to want to reduce trade frictions between the two countries.

Germany is not in a position to negotiate this. Trade with 3rd countries is an EU competency. Starmer’s growth mission will be easier if the UK were to rejoin the single market [and customs union]. This involves him changing his mind, and talking to the Commission [FT] to the Commission in Brussels.

The British people would seem to want to rejoin the EU but the Labour Government and too many experts would seem to be still pursuing the chimera of a mercantilist patchwork trade deal which  must be called “Cakeism” in the UK and  will be called cherry-picking  or extrawurst in the EU. This is not available, neither is a swiss style multi-treaty deal.

Starmer’s government seems to think that revamped Anglo-German military treaty will help the cause of reduced friction trade. There are three problems with this. Just as one shouldn’t start trade negotiations in Berlin but in Brussels, military co-operation needs to involve Poland which now has one of the largest armies in the EU. Since the British ambitions are broader i.e. beyond military co-operation  and to include intelligence sharing and cybersecurity but since the UK was kicked out of Europol as part of Brexit because it no longer recognised the EU’s Charter of Fundamental rights, intelligence sharing will need a common recognition of privacy and judicial rights of citizens. The children and grandchildren of fascist and Stalinist societies will not permit their governments to outsource surveillance to an unrestricted and and unaccountable body. The third problem is that suspicious member states will characterise the UK position as wanting freedom of movement for weapons and ammunition, but not of people, and a single market for guns but not for anything else.

As a counterpoint, Richard Bentall writes  in a thread where he states that “the only way to slow it [rejoining the EU] is by saying it’s too difficult”, to which I add that holding out for better opt-outs is merely delaying rejoining. As a reinforcement, Blade of  the Sun argues that rejoining is simple,

  1. You apply to rejoin.
  2. They tell us what you need to do.
  3. You do it.
  4. Rejoin

And it is that simple, no opt-outs, no special deals but I fear that this Government are not yet ready to drop their dreams of a swiss-style/cakeist deal supported by too-clever academics and journalists, who are looking to ‘hack the treaties’. They need to make their mind up, do they want to be seen to be clever, or change the world; too often this is a choice and one that many academics and journalists fail to address or get wrong. …

Labour and the Cuts (again)

Labour and the Cuts (again)

Two comments on the Reeves announcement to cut albeit fake investment projects and the pensioner’s winter fuel allowance. On the fuel allowance payment, this is not means testing the entitlement, it will be linked to Pension Credit entitlement, the threshold for which which is slightly less than the state pension paid to someone with full contributions record. It also ignores the fact that additional income is taxed. This entitlement limit is £11,500, about half, under the national living wage, and the amount required to sponsor an immigrant is £29,000. I quote these figures to show how necessary and low the contribution-based pension is. This is mean and unnecessary.  

On the macro-economics, the “golden rules” were designed to protect investment against short-term debt management fetishism. Until now no-one has ever argued that you shouldn’t borrow to invest, and while I usually argue that investment in human capital is a legitimate use of the state’s borrowing capability, which some consider to be a stretch, that can be no doubt the roads and railway lines warrant being borrowed for.

Jeremy Hunt and Owen Jones both accused Reeves of implementing cuts that she had always planned to do. If the labour front-bench did not know that the last Tory budget was fake, then they should have done. I’m also taken with the Twitter correspondents here and a thread here who point out that it is not just modern monetarists who state that the constraint on the capacity of the economy is its inputs and neither the money supply or the borrowing capacity. …

More immigration raids? Really?

More immigration raids? Really?

So Labour’s 2nd immigration policy is, it seems to increase raids; not to establish safe routes for asylum seekers, not to recruit more staff to process the asylum claims backlog, not to repeal the litany of the Tories’ appalling laws, not to vacate the Bibby Stockholm & not to abolish the hostile environment.  😭 How does this help “smash the gangs”? One other thing to note, is that people don’t like immigration raids, it’s been very difficult to do them in Glasgow and South London.

Labour’s rhetoric has been and now its policy is about triangulating with and encouraging the racists in Reform and the Tory Party. We shouldn’t be doing this, it’s morally wrong and there are more important jobs to do within the Home Office.  …

The EU’s politics for the next mandate

The EU’s politics for the next mandate

The European Parliament election results were disappointing for democrats and progressives. The Greens and ALDE/Renew both lost seats and the ECR are now the 3rd largest party group. The most shocking results were in France and Germany. The National Rally in France won the most seats and President Macron’s response was to call a snap election, in the hope that once presented with the precipice, the French people would step back. In Germany, the SPD, the senior partner in the Government Coalition came 3rd with 13.9% of the vote with the AfD coming second.

However, it looks like Von der Leyen has won nomination for a continued mandate as President of the Commission together with Antonio Costa (S&D) as Council President and Kaja Kallas (Renew) for External Affairs. Now we’ll have to see if, she can win a majority in the Parliament.

The full article, includes charts and maps illustrating the results and can be viewed using the 'Read More' button. ... ...

The colour of my passport

The colour of my passport

I’m losing hope on my next passport being burgundy.

The only way the UK will rejoin the European Union he’s when it’s ready to be a good citizen.

It is clear that Labour’s leadership despite the opinion polls, have a view that better terms short of membership can be obtained. Firstly, i don’t think it’s desirable, and secondly, I’m not sure it’s available. All the intelligence suggests that the EU has no interest in replicating the Swiss arrangement and that the single market is indivisible.  

Pretending that the Tory deal has failed due to its design and that all it needs is “grown ups in the room”, a view reinforced by numerous academics attempting to prove how clever they are by designing a new relationship, Is unlikely to succeed.

At the moment EU accession requires a unanimous vote on the EU council; this would mean the UK reacquires its political rights and full access to the subsidy programmes. This is unlikely to happen while we have a big bill poster signposts that we proposed to continue to behave as we did before we left.

It looks as if the people are ready to rejoin, but without leadership and a vigorous explanation that the opt-outs have gone and we need to be good citizens within the union I think it unlikely we will persuade the EU that we are suitable candidates.

The EU would almost certainly require a referendum to show that the government mandates is supported. It’s been said many times, that the EU don’t wish to play okie cokie with us.

It is sad that the elections to the European Parliament will have damaged both programmes for reform of the European Union. The Federalist proposition will have been weakened by the losses to the Greens and ALDE (Liberals) in the EP, and the growth of the ECR, who are campaigning to return competencies to the member states, and the alternative, “Sailing the High Seas”, which I characterise as Prix Fixé as opposed to a-la-carte, will have its support weakened by the French and German results where the sponsoring Governments both lost support.

I am of the view that StHS with it flexibility would be a better target to rejoin than the current EU or the Federalist alternative but rejoining the EU is needed to fix our economy and our democracy. People’s sovereignty requires access to human rights courts, and the UK needs an internal subsidiarity agreement, which I hope implementing the Brown Commission proposals will give us although the Labour manifesto promises  the devolution without the funding and structural reform to embed such devolution. …

The GMB & LME

The GMB & LME

At the GMB Congress, my Region, London, organised a fringe meeting on the “The rise of the far right and worker’s rights“. This was jointly organised with the Labour Movement for Europe who had planned to put their President, Stella Creasy, up to speak. I had originally planned to use the meeting and Congress as a last attempt to get better policy on trade and relations with the EU but the announcement of the election obviously changed this, and meant that Stella could not make it. My speech to the fringe, spoke of workers rights, sovereignty and its constraints and looked at the European Parliament results which has occurred on the previous weekend. You will find below my speech notes, although I did not use them all as I was unable to time the speech in practice and had too cut the speech short. …

National Service, the Tories are not fit custodians of the military

National Service, the Tories are not fit custodians of the military

It’s day four of the 2024 general election. In previous elections, I have written various think pieces about Labour’s offer, its manifesto and made some criticisms of Tory attack lines. I don’t know what I’ll be doing this time, as I have a number of blog articles stuck in production hell, which may have to wait until after the election.

I just wanted to comment on Rishi Sunak’s promise to reintroduce national service. This would seem not to be designed as part of an effective defence strategy as some have argued for (or on Medium). There are others, such as Nadia Whittome and David Osland who have eloquently pointed out the national service is not what young people need, what is needed his decent jobs, free education, an affordable home and a decent standard of living.

One dimension I would like to add, to raise is that the Tories are not fit custodians of the British military, particularly the British Army. Cameron’s cuts slashed NCO wages and the Army is struggling to recruit to fill the current underwhelming cadre plans; the Army is the smallest it’s been since the Napoleonic Wars. It’s not capable of meeting realistic future demands in the defence sphere, asking them to train/supervise unwilling teenagers is just more of the Tories fantasy solutions design.

Antisocial behaviour and youth criminality are complex issues; Tory sloganeering is no help and they have proven they are not suitable custodians of the armed forces. …