Politics

11 July 2009

Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics

The debate over the 10p tax controversy on Tuesday was more like a requiem for the Labour party than a rebellion. MPs spoke mournfully about how — yet again — their government would hit the poorest hardest. Gordon Brown had used the 2007 Budget to trick newspapers into reporting that he had lowered the basic rate of tax — when, in fact, he had doubled the 10p starting rate, and left millions of low earners worse off. The Prime Minister had chosen deceit over principle, and Labour MPs had gathered, once more, to discuss what this said about their party.

Why, David Drew, MP for Stroud, asked, is the government causing such ‘hurt amongst core Labour supporters?’ Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) read out a letter from a constituent conveying ‘outrage towards my Labour government that such an attack should be made on low earners like me’. What, Lynne Jones (Birmingham Selly Oak) wanted to know, is so difficult about raising the thresholds and taking people out of tax altogether? Taxing the many not the few, said Frank Field (Birkenhead), ‘flies in the face of what the party is all about’.

As they know perfectly well, the truth is far worse. It is bad enough that Gordon Brown’s spending has almost bankrupted the country. Worse for his own party that he has achieved staggeringly few Labour goals in the process. It is hard to argue that Labour can even be described as ‘progressive’ when one considers its recent record. To understand the existential crisis gripping the party, one must look beyond the opinion polls and deficit figures. By its own yardsticks, the Labour mission must — now that we have 12 years of hard data to examine — be judged an abject failure.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next page

More articles from: Fraser Nelson | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (6)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Annie B

July 9th, 2009 12:41pm Report this comment

Excellently argued Fraser, as I have been saying for very many months now - "Everything they touch turns to dust!"

John Law

July 10th, 2009 4:11pm Report this comment

Fraser
It gets worse, I have just watched Brown at the G8, committing to tackle African poverty.
Poor Buggers!

I unlike most NewLav apparatchiks, I actually grew up in a relatively poor community and understand that the important thing, is to give people a good education and a chance to succeed.

Unfortunately with regimes like the current one, the people who can shop at GUM (remember that?), do rather better than the kulaks

Keith M

July 11th, 2009 5:53am Report this comment

David Cameron would not be 'stealing' so much as restoring genuine ownership to good principles and practices that were fraudulently obtained and then abused by Blair, Brown and that pack of charlatans calling itself New Labour.We have to hope that David Cameron will be a worthy tribune, I believe the prospects are good.

davidke

July 13th, 2009 2:05pm Report this comment

Be fair ref. Blair did tell all teenage voters the night before the election that if they voted labour they would be able to drink all day. Fair's fair.

Bendy Girl

July 14th, 2009 1:03pm Report this comment

£87 per week disposable income? Seriously? As a disabled person in receipt of state benefits I can't imagine knowing such wealthy poor people! Is Fraser Nelson perhaps confusing the £87 with an income support payment for someone with genuine and demonstrable health conditions?
http://benefitscroungingscum.blogspot.com/

cybn

September 2nd, 2009 1:16pm Report this comment

Apart from being absolutely on the mark, this made me reflect on the left's obsession with "poverty", as if it were somehow worse than say cancer. It is not. Grinding poverty is baleful, granted. Relative poverty on the other hand is a different thing altogether. Do I have the right to riot given that 51% of the population earn more than I do?

Post comment