Its commitment to privatisation, its infatuation with the Financial services secto , its consumerist approach to public services have all clearly signalled to those of us on the left that this was not a party embedded in socialist or even social democratic principles at times.
At times all three main parties on the UK political stage have seemed to have more in common than they have between them. Indeed taking the theatrical imagery further, there may be a very wide spectrum of music out there, but the British political establishment has all the variety of the X- factor, multiple bland pop music acts, with similar rictus grins of desperation, appealing to the lowest common denominator.
However the Queen’s Speech before GE (General Election) Day could be a belated effort on the part of the Labour Government to show it realises that many of those who elected it have an interest in challenging inequality rather than reinforcing it. Is it?
A Bill is proposed that would “enhance governance of the financial sector and control the system of rewards.” Tighter regulation of the financial sector is key if the crash of 2008 is to avoid being repeated, and any effective attempts to reign in banking bonuses are more than welcome. The devil here will be in the detail, as to whether Her Majesty’s government actually have strength to take on the city. But challenging bonuses will be popular. Indeed if the legislation allowed for volunteers to pick up individual merchant bankers by their red braces and shake till the money dropped out, then a new mass participation sport would have been invented.
The speech continues to emphasise the governments green credentials, with elements on climate change, carbon capture, the development of hi speed rail networks and flooding and water management. However none of these initiatives seem likely to bear much fruit before the GE day; likewise the creation of a new communications infrastructure. Brief mentions too are provided on further constitutional reform for the devolved nation’s .Will this be an attempt to “Tory- proof” those parts of the UK beyond England’s borders before a David Cameron victory?
Promised proposals on active employment and training programmes are vital at this time, as unemployment continues to rise, while legislation on agency working is long overdue and will hopefully take into account the concerns about the draft bill expressed by the trade union movement. The Queen’s speech also included the Equality Bill, already well known in trade union circles but whose gestation period has been longer that than of an overdue elephant.
At the heart of the proposed legislative programme are a number of measures around inequality. The Child Poverty Bill puts a legal duty on the government to commit to ending child poverty by 2020 by having targets, and strategy and an annual review. Such an emphasis is welcome but needs to be backed up by measures that actually enhance family incomes at the lower end of the spectrum.
Then there are a number of more specific measures; - The Crime and Security Bill, the Education and Families Bill and the Personal Care at Home bill. “Crime and Security“ always sounds good but it will be interesting to see where it goes in terms of more democratic control of policing. Meantime it also contains further measures on anti social behaviour.
The Education Bill has already been subject to a great deal of ridicule as an extreme example of the nanny state by the right wing press, emphasising as they have a raft of guarantees for parents and pupils on their rights. Less publicised at the moment have been the toughening up of the powers of the secretary of state in intervene in so called failing schools. Taken alongside the commitment to the academies and other newer models of schools removed from the local authorities, such measures seem likely to further erode democratic control of education.
The Bill on Personal Care at Home is seen as leading the way toward the national care service of the future, placing an emphasis on making provision. The Bill will offer free domiciliary care to over quarter of a million pensioners providing assistance with basic tasks, as well as providing some services for those recently discharged form hospital.
Some commentators are already on record as urging that local authorities must have full funding for the new initiative, However, it still remains to bow seen whether local authorities will in fact be the principle agents in enacting the legislation or whether some other means of service delivery will be chosen. Like a number of other measures announced, the devil will be in the detail.
Curiously Her Majesty’s speech contains a curious clause that her government will “strengthen public services by ensuring individual entitlements guaranteeing good service”.
What will that mean?
So make up your own mind. Is this a Labour programme? One group who have already decided are the Tory peers in the House of Lords. Lord Strathclyde (elected by no one) is on record as saying that there are sufficient members of the opposition in the House of Lords to ensure that none of these measures get on the statute books. Somehow the idea of an elected government being thwarted in its democratic intentions by a group of rich old men who have their places by inheritance sums up the idiocy at the centre of the British constitution. So if there is to be an introduction of a bill on the further reform of the House of Lords, let’s hope it heads toward a cull of these sad old creatures.
Then finally there is the Fiscal Responsibility Bill. Her Majesty’s Government will legislate to ensure that its public deficit will be cut within 4 years. This will be published with the pre-budget report. That will set out the Government’s credential on public services.