Leah Gunn Barrett
English Labour says the UK economy is growing at the slowest rate for two centuries.[1] Could it have to do with austerity, Brexit, chronic underinvestment, rampant corporate profiteering and high interest rates? And if so, what will a Labour government do?
Fresh from Davos, Rachel Reeves told a meeting in the City of London “every day, every month and every year of a Labour government, Labour will maintain its credibility with the markets and relationship with the City.”[2] Labour has made clear that it will coddle and appease financial markets which means austerity, no public investment, increasing privatisation, no curbs on corporate profiteering and remaining outside the UK’s largest market.
The UK is failing. The number of billionaires has more than tripled since 2010 from 54[3] to 171.[4] Just 50 families[5] possess more wealth than half the UK population. This wealth concentration is the cancer eating away at the UK’s tattered social fabric. Politicians are increasingly reliant on money from wealthy and powerful vested interests and are obediently passing laws and policies that protect those interests.
Meanwhile, real wages have fallen to 2005 levels.[6] The Bank of England is irrationally keeping interest rates high even as inflation cools. This punishes borrowers, hurts small businesses, raises rents and prices, and erodes the spending power of poor and middle-income families. The rich grow richer, corporate profiteering gallops ahead, inequality worsens and the downward cycle continues.
English Labour has forgotten what the post-war Attlee government achieved. In 1946 public debt was 270% of GDP[7] yet the government created the NHS, built thousands of homes and schools, invested in the railways and the mining industry, nationalised public assets, maintained full employment and significantly grew the economy with no inflation.
Only by ending the failing union can Scotland end the misery inflicted upon it by successive Westminster governments and build a state that works for the Scottish People.
[1] https://labour.org.uk/missions/economic-growth/
[2] https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1750457615354601860#
[3] https://equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/news/attachments/Billionnaire%20Britain%20REPORT%20FINAL.pdf
[4] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/19/manchester-united-bidder-jim-ratcliffe-up-to-second-on-uk-rich-list-hinduja-family-richard-branson#:~:text=There%20are%20171%20billionaires%20on,than%20last%20year’s%20rich%20list.
[5] https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk
[7] https://obr.uk/box/post-world-war-ii-debt-reduction/Leah Gunn Barrett
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
I came across this in an old Guardian article from 20 March 2014:
‘Gordon Brown has claimed that low and middle-income families in Scotland would be more than £1bn worse off if the country votes for independence, and re-elects Alex Salmond’s government. The former prime minister said a line-by-line comparison between the Scottish National party’s tax and spending plans with Labour’s offer to voters, which includes higher taxes for the wealthiest, would cost every household in Scotland £450.’
‘He singled out Salmond’s reluctance to promise a new 50p upper rate of income tax or introduce a “mansions tax” for larger homes; while Salmond’s deputy, Nicola Sturgeon, said a 50p rate is the party’s “instinct”, she has refused to commit to that policy before the 2016 Scottish elections.’
We should not forget the almost daily Labour Unionist scares from back then! But coming up to date, on Labour and tax, on 17 January 2024, The Telegraph had this: ‘Rachel Reeves has hinted at tax cuts for top earners as the shadow chancellor attempts to recast Labour as the party of economic growth…’
And even the New Statesman was commenting along similar lines: ‘Labour may never embrace tax rises – Even in office, the party would still want to fend off Tory economic attacks.’
Source: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/labour/2024/01/labour-may-never-embrace-tax-rises
In its recent report entitled ‘Constraints and trade-offs for the next government’, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) noted a few things of relevance to the above in what was a very bleak assessment of the UK’s public finances and services now and for the medium term future. It states:
‘The Labour and Conservative parties seemingly have the same interpretation of fiscal sustainability: both are committed to having the debt-to-GDP ratio on a falling path. As a fiscal rule, this makes no distinction between borrowing for different purposes: borrowing to fund tax cuts or an increase in benefits is treated exactly the same as borrowing to fund additional investment in transport infrastructure. This is not to say that this is the only reasonable definition of fiscal sustainability, but both major parties do seem committed to operating within this particular constraint.’
The IFS adds: ‘The problem is, staying within that constraint in a low-growth, high-interest-rate world will be much harder than it was in the past. This will inevitably make it more difficult for the government to make progress on things we do actually, inherently, care about as ends in themselves.’
And recalling that Gordon Brown’s scare in 2014 about every household in Scotland being £450 worse off if we opt for independence, the IFS in 2024 reports:
‘To make matters worse, whoever is in office after the election will face an electorate that has endured an unprecedentedly long squeeze on living standards.
‘On one measure, average household disposable incomes are currently no higher than in 2015–16, only slightly up on their 2007–08 level, and £10,000 per household per year lower than they would have been had they grown since 2008 at their long-term rate. That makes for a difficult backdrop against which to ask households to accept the sharp end of difficult choices.’
As we face austerity YET AGAIN within this dysfunctional Union, let’s hope the majority of Scotland’s electorate is not duped by Labour politicians next time round!
LikeLiked by 4 people
Great comment stewartb….I fear that any Scot who lends their vote to Labour in the next GE will eventually get ‘buyer’s remorse’ but unfortunately the media in Scotland are determined to try and gain Labour votes here and also lose votes for the SNP.
LikeLike
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE TRUE
AND LABOUR WILL CHANGE ABSOLUTELY SOD ALL
LikeLiked by 2 people
BLAME EVERYTHING ON THE TORIES
AND ANYONE ELSE TO DEFLECT THEIR OWN HOPELESSNESS
AS A POLITICAL PARTY
LikeLiked by 1 person
If Keir Starmer had been in charge of the Labour Party in the past he would have militant left-wingers like Atlee thrown out of the party along with his unaffordable NHS ideas .
LikeLiked by 3 people
Correct!!! The Red Clydesiders would have been derided by Starmer for stoking division….. the dame and Sarwar would have distanced themselves from them
and had the “Scottish media” making fake stories about badScottishSocialists!!!
Starmer would have had his party abstain in the case of John Maclean!!!
“ I wish no harm to any human being, but I, as one man, am going to exercise my freedom of speech. No human being on the face of the earth, no government is going to take from me my right to speak, my right to protest against wrong, my right to do everything that is for the benefit of mankind. I am not here, then, as the accused; I am here as the accuser of capitalism dripping with blood from head to foot.”
John Maclean at his trial!!!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Well said, Leah! 🏴
LikeLike
Why people who support Independence would vote unionist is a mystery. Every person who supports Independence needs to vote for Independence supporting Parties, every election. A higher turnout. Use it or lose it.
On average turnout. Council elections 40%, Holyrood elections 50%. GE 60%. Referendum 85%. If people want Independence they need to vote for it.
LikeLike