license

Creative Commons License
Where the stuff on this blog is something i created it is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License so there are no requirements to attribute - but if you want to mention me as the source that would be nice :¬)
Showing posts with label labour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label labour. Show all posts

Sunday, 4 October 2026

Andy Burnham has started a grown up debate - heres where it ought to go next.

 


The new UK Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, has prompted howls of outrage from some of the media. His felony has been to challenge Thatcher’s almost Orwellian mantra that “Private sector good, public sector bad”. Papers rage at such an affront to the blessed Margaret’s teachings. They say it’s just too awful and beyond acceptable. Maybe the authors of the spluttering editorials and opinion pieces recognize that Burnham has called out the fictions that supported the mantra’s assertions. He’s pointed out the counter facts in plain sight to us all.

So, what was the thinking that lay behind Thatcherism? The 1970’s with strikes and 3 day weeks created the bogeyman of the selfish unions who had to be defanged. At the same time poor performance in some nationalized industries helped create the myth that the public sector always delivered worse than the private sector. And linked to that was the trumpeting of the genius of the market and competition. We were told that fiercely competing companies in an unfettered market would deliver efficiency, innovation and better customer focused services. The entrepreneurs who would lead us towards this nirvana were seen as the cherry on the cake. With deregulation such titans were wealth and job creators who helped grow the economy. And that extra wealth would, of course, trickle down like water to the thirsty less fortunate. Sadly, it turns out that the wealthy aren’t terribly keen on their gains trickling down anywhere, unless it was to their families and away from the inland revenue.

What Andy Burnham appears to have started is a proper discussion about the myths much of the press has peddled to the UK public for the last 50 years. So, what are some of the counter arguments to Thatcher’s myths described above? A starter might be the Banks serial miss-selling scandals from endowment mortgages to pensions to their crooked business model that privatized profit whilst nationalizing their losses, (in the 2008 crash). Or how about the failed delivery from the privatized water companies? A leaking shit storm, metaphorically and literally. Private equity bought up the water companies and burdened them with ruinous debt that went into profits and bonuses rather than assets and services. Via a fiendishly clever web of companies the regulator was largely sidelined as money got stripped out whilst our whilst our rivers and sea became a giant open-air sewer. And lastly there is the example of the expensively privatized national rail operations or London Underground’s asset renewal and maintenance. Most of those are now effectively back in public ownership.

But what Burnham’s honest and helpful analysis hasn’t quite got to yet is Tony Blair’s “things can only get better” contribution which built on the false narratives the Tories launched. Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs) and derivatives of the same were enthusiastically embraced by Blair’s new government. PFIs sprang up in areas like the provision of school buildings, hospital facilities, running prisons or the probation services. And in creating the PFIs many lawyers and consultants made a tidy profit. As did the private companies behind the PFIs. The deal had priced in the supposed higher risk of the services being provided. But after the deals were signed, amazingly within years the supplying companies refinanced at much lower costs, as the reality was this was all financed by the “they’ll never go broke” government. The cost savings made were pocketed, in the early PFIs, by the companies not the taxpayers.

And let’s not forget the increased migration. For centuries the UK’s economy has in part relied on migrants bolstering its workforce. And so, Blair and Boris opened the gates to solve the economy’s labour shortages. But in doing so they never made a proper assessment of what our society’s limits were on how many newcomers we could absorb and integrate. In doing so they stupidly handed those on the far right an opportunity. Working people are fed up with the zero hours gig economy assaults on their job security. They’re fed up with low wages that mean even with two people working benefits from the state are still needed to get to a living wage. They’re nervous about the reducing certainty on pensions in their old age. And they can see their grown-up children having even less opportunities than they did. And the far rights answer to all of this is to blame the migrants and pretend if they weren’t allowed in then it would be all better.  Except it wouldn’t be better, would it?

There are many other economic and influencing crimes all the major UK political parties have been party to which I headline here just for the record. The fiction that all wealthy people are job creating entrepreneurs. Some are, but many are asset owners simply renting out what they inherited. The ever-expanding House of Lords whose growth is fueled by the ennoblement of MPs and advisors as a reward for their loyal service. The lobbyists showering politicians and officials with Taylor Swift concert tickets, expensive dinners and other junkets. And we maintain the fiction that those peddling sweeties are in the altruism game, instead of being honest that they’re in the whispering in the ear game. Or how about the criminally missed opportunity for government to borrow cheaply to invest in infrastructure when interest rates were low? And don’t even get me started on the helpless way in which we’ve allowed private equity vampires to get their fangs into sectors like care homes for older people, facilities for children with special needs and even the vets who look after our beloved pets. In each case the fees have rocketed, and the carers’ wages haven’t.

So, I have four things to say to Andy Burnham. 1) Thanks for starting to talk about some of the falsehoods and real issues we face. 2) Acknowledge new Labour’s part in creating this mess. 3) Clean up the cess pit of the honours system and lobbyists. 4) Get private equity under control before their shadow banking wrecks our economy.


Saturday, 4 October 2025

Is the Daily Mail Newspaper just a little bit biased against the UK's Labour Government?

Jonathan Harold Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere owns the Daily Mail through a complex structure of offshore holdings and trusts.

He has non-domicile (non-dom) tax status which allows him to claim tax concessions.

The front pages below cover the period 2nd June to 13th September 2025


Tuesday, 28 May 2024

Some Fullfact.org fact checkng of politicians claims since a UK general election was announced

I've taken Fullfact.org ‘s corrections to factually incorrect or partial statements from UK political parties, and amended the original text in the claims by politicians so the text corrects/clarifies what was claimed.


Photo by Elena Mozhvilo on Unsplash


Labour Party

On 23/5/24, claimed “seven and a half million cases people are on waiting lists, about some 6.3 million people”

On 27/5/24 Sir Keir Starmer’s made his first major campaign speech  The claims he made are in black font, the strikethrough and red font corrects/clarifies his claims

On the governments approach to Rwanda he claimed “it’s cost £600 million, (Includes some future costs)” and that the “Prime Minister has spent forecast spend is £600 million”. But part of this figure appears to refer to future costs, rather than the amount that has already been spent.

That the “chaos” under the Conservatives was “hitting every working family to the tune of £5,000, compared to a hypothetical scenario”.

Repeated a claim “that the UK army is the smallest it has been since the Napoleonic Wars size is comparable to the period shortly after the Napoleonic wars. “

Claimed that taxes are "were higher in 2022/23 than at any time over the last 70 years since the war".

 

Conservative Party

23/5/24, during an interview Prime Minister Rishi Sunak claimed the text in black font, the red font corrects/clarifies his claims.

 “the economy is growing faster than almost any other major country including the United States if you look at the latest quarterly GDP growth for G7 countries, but the UK has seen comparatively slower growth since the pandemic than most other G7 countries, including the US.”.

On LBC on 24/5/24 energy secretary Claire Coutinho claimed that “Labour did not complete build any [nuclear power stations] in their time in government and neither have any been finished since the Conservatives came into office in 2010”.

In a 24/5/24 post on X Rishi Sunak claimed: “Since I became Prime Minister, net migration has fallen by 10%, but it is four times higher than in 2019, when our manifesto said we’d bring’ ‘overall numbers’ down.”

In a 26/5/24 TV interview, Home secretary James Cleverly was asked about figures showing a 7% increase in knife crime. In response, he claimed the text in black font.“If you took Labour-run London out of the equation, that figure would be down up for year ending December 2023 in England & Wales.” The strikethrough and red font correct/clarify his claim.

27/5/24 online election adverts claimed the text in black font, the red font clarifies the claim  “small boat crossings are coming down” and “small boats [are] down 36% (comparing 2023 to 2022) but as at 26/5/24 are up 38% compared to the same period last year”.

On 28/5/24, during TV and radio interviews, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Mel Stride repeated the following claim in black font, that the government having reduced National Insurance contributions by one third, “is worth a tax cut of £900 to an average earner, but once all tax changes since 2021 are factored in, the saving is some £340 in 2024/25.  Below average earners will actually be worse off.”  (the red font corrects/clarifies his claim)

Sunday, 30 December 2018

59min @RSAEvents clip - 2018: The Year in Review | Catherine Mayer | RSA Replay



Text from youtube "Who are we as a nation as the year draws to a close?

From the Cambridge Analytica revelations to the Trump baby balloon to the Windrush scandal, it’s been another year of tumultuous news and turbulent politics.

Alongside a Brexit process plagued by deadlocks, defeats, and resignations, the big moments of the year – from the Irish abortion referendum to Labour’s antisemitism row – have revealed deep divisions in our society and our politics. How can we understand the stories that have dominated this year’s headlines in the context of such polarisation? What do identity politics have to do with it? And are we really descending into ‘culture wars’?

As 2018 comes to an end, we gather a panel of expert commentators to reflect on the world-shaping headlines that have defined this extraordinary year. "

Thursday, 6 March 2014

#10 things you may not know about #women and #work in the #UK


All this information is sourced from the excellent Women and the economy - Commons Library Standard Note

1) 67% of women - the highest % since records began in 1971 - are in employment (67% of women aged 16-64 in 2013 4th quarter quarter - the highest % since comparable records began in 1971) 

 2) 18% of small & medium sized enterprises were led by women in 2012 (estimate) 

3) 20% of FTSE 100 directors were female at January 2014 (up from 13% in 2011) 

4) The employment rate for women has now exceeded its pre-recession level (whereas that for men has not) 

5) 42% of women in employment work part-time (compared to 13% of men in employment) 

6) Over the past year, the number of women working full-time has increased by 3% whilst those working part-time has fallen by 1% 

7) Self-employed women number are up by 31% since March-May 2008 & the recession (for men the same figure is 8%) 

8) 12% of women in employment work as managers or senior officials (compared to 19% for men)

9) 14% of women are employed in professional occupations (compared to 15% for men) 

10) The gender pay gap is 20% (for all employees full-time and part-time) - for full time its 10% and for part time earnings were 6% higher for women than for men.

Sunday, 26 January 2014

#10 things you may not know about #Voting & #Values & #Religion in #Britain

ht microsoft clipart for the image
This excellent @theosthinktank report - Voting & Values in Britain - Does Religion Count? by Ben Spender and Nick Clements has just come out and an Executive Summary is online to download on their research page 

In summary what it says is:



1) Self-identifying Anglicans are more likely to vote Conservative;

2) Self-identifying Catholics prefer to vote Labour;

3) Self-identifying Non-Conformists have a marginally stronger association with the 3rd party;

4) The Muslim vote favoured Labour;

5) The Jewish vote was more Conservative;

6) The Hindu vote tended to Labour but in 2010 was more balanced;

7) The Sikh vote was evenly split between the 2 main parties;

8) The Buddhist vote was disproportionately for the Liberal Democrats;

9) Values voting issues like sexuality, abortion or family were mentioned by few respondents;

10) Public opinion is: firmly against more tax and spend; more authoritarian than libertarian; moving away from welfarism to individualism.



For the various caveats and nuances around these statements please see the Executive Summary