Friday 28 July 2017

Politics at Friday lunch: Corbyn's Brexit overshoot

"What there wouldn't be is wholesale importation of underpaid workers from Central Europe in order to destroy conditions" - Jeremy Corbyn
View this email in your browser
By Chaminda Jayanetti
 
In one sense, Jeremy Corbyn's interview on the Andrew Marr show last Sunday didn't change anything.
 
He maintained Labour's position - which he stated during the election campaign - that leaving the EU meant leaving the single market.
 
He set out that free movement of people would end, and that Labour would clamp down on the use of migrant labour by employment agencies to undercut British workers - a party commitment dating back to Ed Miliband's leadership.
 
But the language was different.
 
"There would be European workers working in Britain and British workers working in Europe, as there are at the moment," Corbyn told Marr. "What there wouldn't be is wholesale importation of underpaid workers from Central Europe in order to destroy conditions, particularly in the construction industry."
 
For a lot of people, that's all they heard. They didn't hear him go on to point the finger at employment agencies, not migrants themselves: "What we wouldn't allow is this practice by agencies, who are quite disgraceful the way they do it - recruit a workforce, low paid, and bring them here in order to dismiss an existing workforce in the construction industry and pay them low wages."
 
But even some of those who did listen to or read the interview in full were alarmed. Until then, it had always been assumed - not unreasonably - that Corbyn's shadow cabinet colleagues had forced him to abandon free movement against his will.
 
But by using the language he chose - "wholesale importation", "destroy conditions" - he owned Labour's policy to end free movement of people. For the first time, Corbyn owned immigration cuts.
 
For a lot of people this won't have been remotely controversial - but Corbyn's most enthusiastic supporters have been young, radical left-wingers, often with backgrounds in or near the anarchist movements that sprung up around the anti-fees and anti-cuts campaigns of the early 2010s.
 
They are not the numerical bulk of his support, but they were his most passionate supporters when his leadership was at its lowest ebb last year, and they also bring plenty of the organisational and social media nous that were crucial in Labour's election campaign. They are his media outriders, and they pack a punch.
 
Many of them are ambiguous on Brexit - not keen on it, but not keen on the EU either, and repelled by the fervent anti-Brexit militancy of middle class pundits they feel did little to combat austerity.
 
But what they hate more than anything is anti-migrant politics.
 
Thus, Corbyn's comments brought criticism from unprecedented quarters - Novara, the heavily pro-Corbyn media site, broadcast a show where three of the four guests criticised his remarks; foreign policy writer David Wearing warned that "casting around for a socialist alibi for deferring to anti-immigration sentiment is entirely the wrong approach"; journalist Rachel Shabi (somewhat older than the 2010 generation) criticised his "divisive" rhetoric. Others voiced similar opinions.
 
What to make of this reaction?
 
Let's be clear - Corbyn's core support isn't about to ditch him. None of those mentioned are turning their backs on the Labour leader or the movement he represents. Corbyn has been a staunch supporter of migrant campaigns for years, regardless of their broader popularity. That gives him a significant 'trust surplus' on these matters - and most will accept that he meant to criticise the employment agencies, no matter how flawed his choice of language.
 
But should Corbyn repeat this rhetoric in future - which would represent an almost unthinkable departure from the politics of even his recent past - that could change. Corbyn overshot on Marr. He must be careful not to do so again.
 
As must Barry Gardiner, Labour's international trade secretary. Gardiner's article this week saying Britain must leave the single market and the customs union in order to deliver Brexit was astonishingly hardline, and sparked a more concrete backlash - including from Sir Keir Starmer and Emily Thornberry, if reports are to be believed, not to mention the swift disownment of his comments by Corbyn's press team.
 
In fact, it's been a week of two halves for Labour on Brexit - first, Corbyn and Gardiner taking a harder-edged approach; then John McDonnell and Diane Abbott suggesting single market membership was still on the table. Footage emerged of shadow cabinet member Andrew Gwynne hinting that Labour could even switch sides on Brexit if public opinion shifted against leaving.
 
Let's be blunt - this is bullshit. Everything Labour is saying about Brexit is bullshit. All the positioning, all the spinning, all the facing all different ways, is bullshit. Labour has no coherent policy on Brexit and it does not seem to care. Those who do care, such as Abbott and Starmer, are often divided.
 
Labour's leadership sees Brexit as a Tory problem and a Tory mess that Labour's one job is to profit from - if the country crashes on the Tories' watch, Labour gains. Tactical ambiguity is tactical bullshit. Because in politics, bullshit works.
 
One day Labour figures hint at a harder Brexit, the next it's a nod towards soft. Next week they'll be back to hard. Then something else. Labour's real Brexit policy is "yadda yadda yadda, who else you gonna vote for?"
 
They are betting on that being a question without an answer.

Latest Articles

 


 
 

The government must act to rescue Northern Irish power-sharing


 

On Jul 28, 2017 10:56 am
Northern Ireland secretary James Brokenshire always tries to avoid the last problem rather than avoiding the next one
Read more... »
 

Labour talks about student debt - but crisis debt is what really counts


 

On Jul 27, 2017 03:33 pm
It's not just student debt that needs writing off. People in debt because of welfare cuts and austerity need their debts written off too.
Read more... »
 

We need to talk about the UK's aid budget


 

On Jul 27, 2017 11:20 am
Supporters of Britain's foreign aid spending must critique it themselves to protect it from right-wing attacks
Read more... »
 

Sir Vince Cable's mission for the Lib Dems - and Britain


 

On Jul 26, 2017 04:39 pm
The new Lib Dem leader must plot a course to profit from the failings of his rivals
Read more... »
 

The government must act now to tackle the crisis in our youth jails


 

On Jul 26, 2017 12:52 pm
The Chief Inspector of Prisons' report provides a horrifying insight into the conditions in which children are held
Read more... »
 

Gove the environmentalist - too good to be true?


 

On Jul 25, 2017 05:01 pm
There were unexpected positives in Michael Gove's first speech as environment secretary - but is it all just hot air?
Read more... »
 

Housing, not student fees, is the key to the young vote


 

On Jul 25, 2017 12:35 pm
There are many good reasons to scrap tuition fees - but for the Tories to win the support of younger voters, they must prioritise housing
Read more... »
 

The Lola Ilesnami case highlights the Home Office's failings


 

On Jul 24, 2017 01:56 pm
Women are left at risk of poverty and abuse because of the Home Office's mistakes
Read more... »
 

Opinion Formers press releases


 
 

Don't abolish tax relief for unreimbursed employee expenses


The Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) is calling on the Government not to abolish income tax relief for legitimate work-related expenses for which they are not reimbursed by their employer.
Read more... »
 

NASUWT comments on Labour's class size figures


No credible government strategy to tackle the burdens on teachers
Read more... »
 
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Twitter
Website
Website
Copyright © 2017 Senate Media Ltd, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at www.politics.co.uk

Our mailing address is:
Senate Media Ltd
18 Vine Hill
London, EC1R 5DZ
United Kingdom

Add us to your address book


unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences 

Friday 21 July 2017

Politics at Friday lunch: One step forward two steps back for women's equality

"You're an industry doing so well, soon you'll be able to afford a BBC man." - Emily Maitlis
View this email in your browser

For those who care about equality for women, the week got off to a good start. Jodie Whittaker being cast as the first female Doctor Who was something to celebrate. It might just be one lead role in one programme but the symbolism of it showed progress.

By the middle of the week that jubilation had turned to anger when the BBC published a list of its highest paid stars. Just a third of its 96 top earners are women. We all know the gender pay gap exists - in the UK men are paid on average around 18% more than women - but to see it laid out so starkly was shocking nonetheless.

The best-paid female star at the BBC, Claudia Winklemen is paid around £500,000 a year, while top male earner Chris Evans receives around £2.2m. Clare Balding, a well-loved sports presenter was listed as earning between £150,999 - £199,999 a year compared to a whopping £1.75m - £1.79m paid to Match of the Day presenter Gary Linekar. Meanwhile newsreader Huw Edwards earns up to £599,000 a year, while the BBC's political editor Laura Kuenssberg receives £249,000.

The BBC is by no means the worse offender. Across all jobs at the Corporation the gender pay gap is 10%, significantly less than the national average. And it's also worth pointing out that the list doesn't distinguish between people whose pay is for multiple jobs and those who are paid for just one, so it isn't quite as clear cut as two people doing the same job for different pay. But there is no doubt that there's a problem that needs to be dealt with.

What has been amusing to watch over the last few days, is the outrage from sections of the press over the issue. While naming and shaming the big earners and criticising the BBC for the inequality in pay, most failed to mention the pay gap within their own organisations. A survey carried out last year by the City University London of 700 British journalists showed that nearly 50% of female journalists earned £2,400 or less a month compared with a third of men. Given their anger over the BBC list, I'm sure they are all now working really hard to get their own houses in order.

As the week draws to a close, the focus has moved from equal pay to women's reproductive rights. Boots has refused to reduce the price of the morning after pill in line with other retailers, for fear that it could be accused of "incentivising inappropriate use". What they mean by inappropriate is not clear. Is the company making a judgement on how often women should be allowed to use the drug.? Do they think once a year is too often? Once a month? Or perhaps they believe that if women know they can buy it for around £15 rather than £30 they will abandon all forms of regular contraception and rely only on the emergency option. Whatever the reason, the judgement is not theirs to make.

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service was right when it said the chemist's decision was "patronising and insulting". Their job is not to moralise and place barriers to access to the drug. Women do not need to be persuaded or dissuaded from using a particular contraception. We are more than capable of looking at the options available to use and making an informed choice of what is better for us at any particular time.

Perhaps the most surprising thing about this story though is that Boots say they receive "frequent" complaints from people who "voice their disapproval" that the company sells the morning after pill at all. So in 2017 there are still people who will take time out of their day to try to prevent women making their own decisions about their own bodies.

When it comes to women's rights, it seems for every step forward there is very often two steps back. From equal pay to reproductive rights women are still experiencing regular discrimination because of our gender. The fight for equality still has a long way to go.

Natalie Bloomer

Latest Articles

 
 

I'm working class and just dropped out of uni: Don't tell me tuition fees have no effect


 

On Jul 19, 2017 12:06 pm
Critics of Corbyn's free tuition pledge ignore what it would mean for people in my situation
Read more... »
 

Prime minister of secrets: The short, closed premiership of Theresa May


 

On Jul 19, 2017 10:23 am
All of May's key decisions have been made in secret
Read more... »
 

The brutal complexity of Brexit's pensions nightmare


 

On Jul 19, 2017 09:15 am
The pensions issue involves deep, system-wide complexity
Read more... »
 

The left doesn't have a misogyny problem, men have a misogyny problem


 

On Jul 18, 2017 01:41 pm
If we really want to tackle online abuse we must look at the roots of it: male aggression
Read more... »
 

Real progress will be when we don't have to celebrate a woman being cast as the Doctor


 

On Jul 18, 2017 12:12 pm
One woman in fifty years isn't political correctness gone mad, or going too far. It's barely even starting
Read more... »
 

Brexit's toll on foreign policy: Losing our reputation day after day


 

On Jul 17, 2017 10:34 am
Whether through arrogance or incompetence, the government is trashing Britain's reputation
Read more... »
 

Don't let them whitewash Brexit


 

On Jul 17, 2017 09:27 am
The vote last June wasn't a statement of 'global Britain', it was just the latest tawdry chapter in Britain's long anti-immigrant history
Read more... »
 

Opinion Formers press releases

 
 

ScotRail firearms ban will derail rural tourism in Scotland, says BASC


BASC is campaigning for ScotRail to reverse a firearms ban the UK's largest shooting organisation believes will damage Scotland's rural tourism industry.
Read more... »
 

Gross mortgage lending £22.1 billion in June


UK Finance estimates that gross mortgage lending reached £22.1 billion in June
Read more... »
 

 

Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Twitter
Website
Website
Copyright © 2017 Senate Media Ltd, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at www.politics.co.uk

Our mailing address is:
Senate Media Ltd
18 Vine Hill
London, EC1R 5DZ
United Kingdom

Add us to your address book


unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences 

Friday 14 July 2017

Week in Review: Theresa May's first year report card 

"He can occasionally see to an enemy," she conceded, "if he manages to get his sword pointed in the right direction and the enemy does him the favour of falling upon it in precisely the right way." - Lynn Kurland, Star of the Morning.
View this email in your browser

On Thursday, we reached the first anniversary of Theresa May's time in Downing Street. During this period she has pursued a hopelessly mangled Brexit strategy, rebranded the Conservative party with hard right-wing nativism, trashed Britain's global reputation and thrown away her own majority in a fit of imperial arrogance. We are unlikely to have to mark her second.

It wasn't like this a year ago. Back then, she appeared to represent order in the chaos. Michael Gove was trying to stab Boris Johnson, who himself would have stabbed anyone if it put him in power, while Andrea Leadsom was jabbering on pathetically about how she was morally superior because she had managed to use her reproductive organs. May looked like a grown-up in comparison. Her politics were dreadful, of course, but at least she was competent and did not appear to be motivated exclusively by self-interest, unlike those around her.

And yet, the clues were all there. At the Home Office she had enforced a 'hostile environment' intended to reject all applications for visas unless there really was no way around it. She initiated the infamous Go Home vans. She made up unspeakable nonsense about cats and human rights law. She left that department in as great a mess as she found it.

In retrospect, all the qualities of her time as prime minister were there from the start: the ineffectual decision-making, the reactionary ideology, the emphasise on looking tough over actually dealing with the issues.

And so it has turned out. May interpreted the Brexit vote as a demand for a reactionary overhaul of British society. She would eradicate freedom of movement, which meant leaving the single market. The economic price of this decision was very grave indeed, but she didn't care. Reducing immigration had become the alpha and the omega of British politics. And there was a cultural dimension to this approach. May engaged in a culture war against anyone with an international sensibility, or who valued diversity, or who had multiple identities, or who was an immigrant, or who was the child of immigrants. This was not said outright, of course, but the message came across loud and clear. "If you believe you are a citizen of the world, you're a citizen of nowhere," she said.

But the public were soon to find out the chief attribute of nationalists: they have no answers.

May drew a red line for herself on the European Court of Justice - a body which had barely featured in the referendum campaign but which irritated the hardline cabal of Brexit lunatics in the Tory party - and then found that it made whole sections of her Brexit strategy all-but impossible. She ignored and humiliated the devolved governments. She pulled out of Euratom, which manages the supply and treatment of nuclear materials, seemingly without knowing what the consequences were. She overhauled the civil service for Brexit, which wasted time and capacity only to produce a tripartite system which does not properly function. She put disgraced former minister Liam Fox in charge of trade, who then proceeded to spend thousands on foreign trips with no achievements to show for them. She ignored repeated offers from experts to help with Brexit. She sacked a senior civil servant for raising concerns about the scale of the task ahead of her, only to instantly capitulate to the Europeans when the warnings she had failed to heed immediately came to pass. She surrounded herself with two figures - Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill - who failed to build a relationship with journalists, were rude to her colleagues and had no political judgement whatsoever. She sabotaged Britain's standing abroad by installing Boris Johnson in the Foreign Office. She tried to control all decision-making from No.10 without any ability to delegate or allow for the smooth running of government. She floated policies - like the naming and shaming of companies which employ foreign workers - which poisoned our European negotiating partners against us. She threw away her leverage on when to trigger Article 50 seemingly without even realising it was leverage. She failed to address the significant limitations she had in terms of time or negotiating capacity. She was unable to convince the EU team to allow talks to take place in parallel instead of in sequence. She trashed Britain's global reputation by refusing to guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK. She was treated as a joke by European leaders when they realised how weak her understanding of the issues was. She then accused them,in a fit of nativist hysteria, of trying to subvert British democracy. She threw her lot in with Donald Trump by offering him a state visit, only to then look a fool when she realised British citizens were affected by a Muslim travel ban the US president hadn't bothered to tell her about. She introduced policies, for instance on grammar schools, which she was unlikely to be able to get through parliament. She tried to create a cult of personality around herself, only to look startled when her introverted nature meant it fell apart. She came out with the most ludicrous, dated nonsense, from a distinction between 'boy jobs' and 'girl jobs' to her shame over having run through "fields of wheat". She established no stress-testing function for policy and instead formulated it with her two advisers, only for it to fall apart in an utterly predictable way once it was released. She showed almost no backbone at all when the right-wing press attacked, whether it was due to the Budget or social care. And then when she did U-turn she would do so while leaving questions about the extent of the decision, thereby ensuring that she had not even killed off the coverage. In the case of the dementia tax, she did all this while pretending that "nothing has changed", making her look like a liar as well as a coward. She demanded support for her Brexit plan without deigning to tell the public what it entailed, thereby depriving the country of a reasoned debate. After the election she didn't even appear to acknowledge that anything had changed, so she appeared deranged as well as humiliated. She then sabotaged efforts to solve the impasse at Stormont by stitching up a tawdry backroom deal with the DUP, raising questions about Westminster's ability to act as a neutral arbiter in Ireland.

The list of her failures goes on and on. They are moral, political, economic, strategic and presentational. She is a full-spectrum political disaster.

It may be one year in power, but the reality is that May is prime minister in name only. The only reason she is able to stay in Downing Street is because her Cabinet members want to use her as a human shield, taking the political damage for a policy which they themselves also supported. When historians come to write about her, they will treat May as a symptom and a cause of national decline.

Latest Articles

 
 

Small print of repeal bill creates unprecedented new powers for Brexit ministers


 

On Jul 13, 2017 04:11 pm
There has never been a bill like this before. Ministers are about to gain more power than they could have ever dreamed of.
Read more... »
 

PMQs: Thornberry hammers Tories over no-deal Brexit


 

On Jul 12, 2017 01:07 pm
Labour stand-in does strong work against government confusion over Brexit, but her side are essentially in same position.
Read more... »
 

 
 

'It's a trap': Home Office accused of biometrics powergrab over Grenfell amnesty  


 

On Jul 10, 2017 12:14 pm
A Home Office offer of twelve month's immigration amnesty for survivors of the Grenfell disaster has been branded a trap by a leading human rights group.
Read more... »
 


 
 

The Tory-DUP deal makes a united Ireland easier to deliver


 

On Jul 14, 2017 09:54 am
Increased spending in Northern Ireland could start to bring north and south together
Read more... »
 

Euratom is the perfect test case for revoking Article 50


 

On Jul 13, 2017 09:40 am
We urgently need to change course on Euratom - and doing so will prove Brexit can be reversed as well
Read more... »
 

Food prices set to soar as hard Brexit approaches


 

On Jul 12, 2017 08:27 am
Pushing Britain out of the Customs Union will trigger significant price increases at the supermarket check out.
Read more... »
 

We can't negotiate with Europe until we understand it


 

On Jul 11, 2017 09:12 am
The EU doesn't 'need us more than we need them'. It needs political unity - and the sooner we recognise it, the better.
Read more... »
 

Opinion Former videos


 

About the Committee on Climate Change

 

On Jun 28, 2017 05:46 pm
The Committee on Climate Change provides independent advice to government on reducing emissions and preparing for climate change.
Read more... »

Intellectual property – why you should choose the UK

 

On Jun 05, 2017 02:12 pm
Intellectual property rights help businesses to compete on this global stage. To protect your hard work and investment, you need advice from IP professionals who have an international perspective and specialist skills and knowledge. UK IP professionals are respected throughout the world for their ability to deal with complex and challenging matters.
Read more... »
 

Opinion Formers press releases


 
 

Home buyers up 12% in May compared to April


On a non-seasonally adjusted basis, UK Finance data shows that mortgage lending in May rose
Read more... »
 

Taylor may deliver fairness in terms of rights but more work is needed for tax fairness and simplicity


Whilst welcoming the Taylor Review's fairness proposals, the CIOT advises more needs to be done regarding tax outcomes
Read more... »
 

 

 

Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Twitter
Website
Website
Copyright © 2017 Senate Media Ltd, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at www.politics.co.uk

Our mailing address is:
Senate Media Ltd
18 Vine Hill
London, EC1R 5DZ
United Kingdom

Add us to your address book


unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences