 |
| Theresa May has called for unity and social harmony, but she offers little to ordinary people in return. |
This manifesto is Theresa May's belated opportunity to stamp her identity of the Conservative Party. In what became her very short campaign for the role of Conservative leader, she chose to emphasise the Unionist element of the fully titled Conservative and Unionist Party.
At the 2017 manifesto launch, "Forward Together" was written on the front of May's podium as she strained to come across as a 'compassionate conservative' and the word "Unionist" was restored to the party's name on the front of the manifesto.
Inside the document, there was an effort to rewrite what it means to be conservative. It called for "commitment to country and community", "belief in national institutions", and obligations to one another stronger than individual rights as community and nation demand.
That definition is unionist to its core. In her first major speech as leader, she listed her hero as the Unionist Joseph Chamberlain. As Mayor of Birmingham, he led the modernisation of the city through public-private initiatives and the establishment of public utilities, in decisive acts of intervention.
There are some among the Tories who are perturbed by what they see as a similar interventionist streak. May's first manifesto and her launch speech seem to have been shaped to confirm that impression. But there is a real contrast between the tone and the content.
The headlines that the Conservatives drip fed to the media over night, before the launch, were all focused on what the party would do to address the dire state of social care - which critics say has seen a funding cut of over £4 billion on their watch.
Theresa May pitched a long term plan. The first step appears to be to launch a raid on the middle class: from their assets on one hand - those with holdings over £100,000 will pay more - to their winter fuel allowance, which will be means-tested to raise £1 billion.
The belt-tightening Tory plan extends down the income brackets. Pensions will again see cuts. With £8 billion already shaved across the Parliament (2015-2020) with the flat-rate pension, ending the triple-lock will be further hurt for the low paid on just the state pension.
While an argument might justifiably be made that the triple-lock has proven very expensive - pensioner incomes have risen 10% above inflation - not enough is being done to lower the cost of living, particularly in old age, to ease such a 'rebalancing'.
It is perhaps this that has motivated an intervention in the energy sector with an unspecified "safeguard tariff cap" on prices and a commission and independent review into how to ensure energy costs stay low, with a promise to ensure fair markets.
But let's be clear: social care changes brought in by raising the means-tested level to £100,000 does nothing to change the conditions for the poorest. These measures raise maybe £2 billion per year, at best, in additional funding to aid an ailing system.
That means the poorest will continue to rely on strained and underfunded care services, while the homeowning middle class will be paying far more for privatised care - and still won't be able to pass on their family homes to their children.
In fact, when you take into account hinted Tory plans to give workers the right to unpaid carers leave, it paints a picture of Conservatives intending to wean people off of state care.
Perhaps learning from the Cameron years, hard targets seem to have been replaced by lots of vague promises: to simplify tax laws, to stop tax evasion, to protect gig economy workers and to put more money in the NHS (despite having yet to meet their previous targets) - though the promises to control immigration continue to be more clearly specified.
But what does not seem to have changed is their attitude to the fiscal role of the government.
Current spending stands this year at around £720 billion to £740 billion in revenue, while Capital spending sits at around £80 billion. As the Tories combine Current and Capital spending to calculate the deficit, it stands at about £59 billion.
With further commitments to eliminate the deficit, across both Current and Capital spending, a National Productivity Investment Fund of £23 billion - even if it turns out to be rebranded rather than new money - heralds more austerity cuts to come, either from other infrastructure spending or from departmental budgets.
And that matters. Britain has already been hard hit by austerity. Yet despite in her manifesto disavowing the liberal conservative legacy of Cameron and Osborne and claiming that the state has a role, May is continuing their squeeze on public services.
Note here, that what can be interpreted about how the Tories will manage the economy has no help from the manifesto, which has no costings whatsoever. Just vague promises and vague numbers with no explanation of where money will be found, or taken.
The reality is that easing the social care strain by having the middle class pay more and by restraining the pensions of the least well off does nothing to increase the stake of ordinary people in their country. May is preaching a new Union, but it's still the same old unredeemed and hard to believe Tory slogan: "We're all in this together".
This is not an inclusive manifesto. It is not progressive. It is social harmony Unionism, putting the vague notion of a 'country' before the needs of the actual people. Theresa May demands unity, but doesn't offer ordinary people a real stake in the country.
Progressives and reformers will also be particularly unhappy to see Theresa May doubling-down on retaining power, with specific commitments to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, preserve First Past the Post and to require voter ID - all measures empowering the government of the day to stay there.
The path ahead, under the Conservatives, will continue to see the burdens fall on the poorest. Nothing in this document changes that. It is imperative that there be a progressive alliance to resist and oppose, because we need a strong opposition.
References
'Forward Together: Our Plan for A Stronger Britain and a Prosperous Future - The Conservative Party Manifesto 2017'; from the Conservative and Unionist Party; as of 18 May 2017.
Lewis Goodall's 'Who was Theresa May's political hero Joseph Chamberlain?'; on the BBC; 15 August 2016.
Ben Wright's 'General Election 2017: Is Theresa May a 'Red Tory'?'; on the BBC; 17 May 2017.
Heather Stewart & Peter Walker's 'Social care crisis: MPs put May under pressure to act fast - Select committee chairs send frank letter to prime minister as fears grow that Brexit could overshadow ‘immense challenge’'; in The Guardian; 6 January 2017.
Anushka Asthana & Rowena Mason's 'Social care spending falling below £554 minimum in most areas: Postcode lottery revealed as government prepares to allow local authorities to bring forward council tax rises to avert crisis'; in The Guardian; 12 December 2016.
'Social care funding'; from Full Fact; 14 December 2016.
'Conservative manifesto: Social care shake-up in Theresa May's plans'; on the BBC; 18 May 2017.
Nick Triggle's 'Conservative manifesto: Tory social care plan explained'; on the BBC; 17 May 2017.
Laura Kuenssberg's 'Tory manifesto: May's bid to be tough not cruel'; on the BBC; 17 May 2017.
Phillip Inman's 'Poorest face "double whammy" if Tories ditch triple lock on pensions: Removal of minimum rise could push many into poverty'; in The Guardian; 30 April 2017.
Kerry-Anne Mendoza's 'Theresa May is offering a new contract to UK workers, but there’s a bombshell buried in the small print'; from The Canary; 15 May 2017.
Denis Campbell's 'Theresa May’s claim on NHS funding not true, say MPs: Two Tories among signatories of letter pointing out that PM’s statement about £10bn extra cash for the health service is untrue'; in The Guardian; 30 October 2016.
'Spring Budget 2017'; from HM Treasury; 8 March 2017.
No comments:
Post a Comment