Posted in Infrastructure

Yvette Cooper is wrong about nationalisation

Yvette CooperThis was bound to come back at some point. In a speech this week to launch The Changing Work Centre – a new think tank looking at, you guessed it, the changing nature of work – Yvette Cooper admonished Jez and John McDonnell for talking about re-nationalisation. “Labour must not get drawn into touting yesterday’s solutions to tomorrow’s problems. Things like nationalising power companies don’t do anything to help young people trying to build a new app or older workers stuck in precarious temporary work.” Of course, she would be right. If that was what the Labour leadership were actually arguing.

This line first got an airing over the summer. As she was the one who took His Tonyness seriously and tried to make the future her “comfort zone” by talking about futurey things, Yvette – subtly, of course – painted Jez and John as Jurassic Park extras for advocating the most offensive N-word in the New Labour dictionary. However, it’s completely disingenuous. Continue reading →

Labour’s economic alternative should centre on a national investment bank

investment, pic by 123rf.comLabour is now carrying out extremely effective campaigning against Tory policies – on tax credits, on the sweetheart Google taxation deal, in support of the junior doctors and pinning the responsibility for the crisis in the NHS squarely on the Tories. This excellent work needs to continue and be strengthened.

But in the forthcoming budget Labour must also set out the framework for a comprehensive macro-economic alternative to Osborne’s austerity. This article argues why the centre piece of this should be to reinforce the existing pledge to increase infrastructure investment with the establishment of a National Investment Bank. Continue reading →

What level of investment should Corbyn & McDonnell aim for?

Corbynomics1-2The policies outlined by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell have the capacity to transform the economic debate in Britain. More importantly, if the ideas outlined for an investment-led recovery are implemented then they could alter the trajectory of the British economy, from stagnation and rising inequality towards sustainable growth and a general rise in living standards.

Therefore it is important to examine thoroughly what is the scale of the investment needed, which areas will be prioritised, what will be the overall effects on the economy, how it will be funded, and a number of other questions. Here, only an outline of the first question is addressed, what is the scale of the investment needed? Continue reading →

iPads + superfast broadband = socialism (or maybe just a kinder, fairer capitalism)

iPad for socialismSocialism is Jeremy Corbyn in Number 10 plus superfast broadband! Okay, not as pithy as Lenin’s definition involving soviet power and electrification, but John McDonnell’s speech on Wednesday is a continuation of a fine tradition in left and centre left politics: the close alignment of our policy agenda with technological dynamism. Though, of course, it’s more than just a nice rhetorical flourish – the lining up alongside futurity in John’s case has a double purpose. His iPads and Socialism speech was an attempt to wrest the white heat of technology from the grip of George Osborne, who’s made much of his fetish for graphene and high speed rail; and to bring out the shiny contours of contemporary left Labourism against the soot-streaked brutalism of nationalisations past. Continue reading →

On Tory indifference to steel and to human tragedy, and their hatred of solidarity

tata steel jobs copyIt was like the crashing of dominoes, except the toppling was done by livelihoods, supply chains, ways of life. First, SSI in Redcar announced it was going belly up. And after toing and froing with the government, once it was clear state aid wasn’t forthcoming it was as if Britain’s steel bosses huddled together and decided the time was right for job losses.

2,200 are going in Redcar. Tata are shedding 1,200 in Scunthorpe and Lanarkshire, and a further 1,800 are in danger. They blame energy costs and the flooding of European markets by dirt cheap Chinese steel. That’s the government’s narrative as well, ruling out action on grounds it’s against EU rules. It’s convenient to have someone else to blame. Continue reading →