How To Defeat The Tory Threat

For anyone on the progressive side of politics, the prospect of a Tory government being formed at the next general election should fill them with anger.

The core of Tory policy, under cover of rhetoric dealing with the financial crisis, is to attack those who had no responsibility in creating the crisis. Those who primarily did would, on the contrary, be protected.

Those on average incomes, the least well-off, the unemployed, teachers, health workers and others would suffer the effects of a savage attack on public spending. Bankers and those with large sums of money to pass on as inheritances would be protected. These are open class war policies with a vengeance.

The Tories, having largely dropped the cuddly disguise David Cameron tried to project, have reverted to Thatcherism mark II.

To divert attention from the harsh economic medicine that Cameron would be handing out, Britain would also be in for a dose of right-wing ideology and repressive policies.

That is why the Tories present immigrants and not bankers as the source of the economic problems confronting the country.

We would have a great deal of talk about fighting crime while, as in London, police numbers would probably be cut.

Public money would be squandered in an ideological campaign against people who have chosen not to marry, or those who separate or divorce, through "recognition of marriage in the tax system" with further cuts to pay for this.

A meaningful fight against climate change would be abandoned.

This week's GDP figures of only 0.1 per cent growth show just how feeble the economic recovery is. The Tories would threaten this by reining back the stimulus for demand created by public spending.

Tory policies are, therefore, not only reactionary but economically illiterate. They do nothing to address the real needs of the economy - which requires investment to promote growth - as well as doing social and environmental damage.

Any supporter of coherent economic policy and social justice, and anyone who cares about the future of the planet, has to be opposed to such right-wing policies.

The Tories' platform is also not popular. Despite blatant and flat-out campaigning for the Conservatives by almost all the print media and large parts of the electronic media, and despite Labour being in office in the worst economic crisis for 70 years, the Tories have scarcely succeeded in raising their level of support above 40 per cent.

Labour's problem is not the high level of support for the Tories but the low level of support for itself. Therefore, the crucial issue is not the popularity of right-wing Tory policies, as the facts show they are not popular, but the need to develop and implement a progressive alternative to them.

Such progressive policies, to be effective, must support both those on middle incomes and the less advantaged. These together constitute a large majority of the electorate and their combined support has been, and will always continue to be, sufficient to ensure progressive victories.

What is hopeless is concentrating on attempting to win over the well-off - "champagne socialists." Progressive policies in Britain have never needed their support to win elections nor, of course, have they received it.

If "champagne socialism" was morally repellent during the boom, then in a period of economic crisis where there are therefore reduced resources, it is directly electorally damaging.

"Champagne socialist" policies mean there are less resources for those on middle incomes and the less well off who constitute the majority of the electorate. Nor are people interested in abstract "GDP growth" as they want to know whether they will be better off or not.

The reason policies like the 50 per cent tax band or the taxes on bankers' bonuses are popular is because they transfer resources from a small, privileged minority to people on middle incomes and the less well off. People want real economic benefits for themselves, not abstract talk about "recovery" if the proceeds of that go to the well-off.

Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the Trident programme, are not only morally and politically wrong but they increase the financial strain on ordinary voters. When the world is faced with the need to conserve resources to deal with climate change, which will affect the lives of everyone, wasting resources on grotesque wars and military programmes is particularly unacceptable.

The key terrain on which Labour must fight the election is that it protects those on middle incomes and the least advantaged, against the Tories who would transfer resources from the average elector to the well-off.

But nevertheless, it is clear that not all those who support progressive policies are going to vote Labour. Indeed, a widespread debate on many issues is taking place among those who support a progressive agenda. In such a situation it is therefore vital that Labour not only hammers out its own policies but engages in dialogue and united action with others who support a progressive agenda.

This is the theme of the Progressive London Conference, which is taking place today in the capital, and why it includes leading Labour politicians such as Harriet Harman, Ed Miliband, Jon Cruddas and Diane Abbott. Alongside these figures, we have Liberal Democrats such as Lembit Opik and Mike Tuffrey, Greens including Jenny Jones, George Galloway from Respect, John Haylett from the Morning Star and figures from media and entertainment including Bonnie Greer, Johann Hari, Kevin Maguire and Speech Debelle.

At the coming general election each party will, of course, be seeking to maximise its support. But this must not cut across co-operation and debate among those who seek to implement a progressive agenda and stop the coming to office of a right-wing Tory administration.

Mandelson: Blair Will Campaign In Election

Tony Blair is to end his self-imposed exile from politics to campaign for another term in office for Gordon Brown, it emerged last night.

The rivalry between Mr Blair and his former Chancellor since Labour came to power in 1997 has been well documented. But Lord Mandelson, a key adviser to both men, said yesterday that the former Prime Minister would be hitting the campaign trail to help earn his party a fourth term.

The timing of the announcement will surprise many as it comes just before Mr Blair's appearance at the Iraq inquiry on Friday, reminding voters of his role in committing Britain to an unpopular war. He has also made headlines this week for accepting a six-figure deal to deliver speeches for a firm accused of profiteering from the credit crunch. Lansdowne Partners, a hedge fund accused of making millions by "short-selling" shares during the financial crisis, has signed up Mr Blair to deliver four speeches on world politics.

His reappearance will also annoy many in the party, who believe Mr Blair will be more of a liability than an asset going into an election that will see Labour struggling to stop the Tories from gaining an overall majority.

However, others in the party believe that Mr Blair still has appeal for the middle classes in marginal seats, a constituency that will be critical in deciding the outcome of the election. David Cameron, the Tory leader, has attempted to style his party as having taken on the progressive mantle of Mr Blair.

Lord Mandelson said he would be joined by other figures from the early days of New Labour. "We want all the party's leadership – past and present – to be contributing to our electoral success," Lord Mandelson told the Daily Mirror. "They know what is at stake for the country." He added: "Everyone will get stuck in. Everyone will campaign: Tony Blair, John Prescott, David Blunkett. We need the support of these well-known faces."

Parents Need Policies Not Platitudes From David Cameron

I am looking forward what the fightback has to offer us it is for this reason why I am voting for a Labour Government as this Government is doing a lot to help the many & not the privileged few, I would urge all comrades to join We're Backing Brown, LabourWin, Believe in Labour, At the 2010 General Election, I'm voting Labour.

Dawn Primarolo MP, Labour’s Children and Families Minister said:

"Parents need policies not platitudes from David Cameron. Families in Britain don't just want warm words, they deserve to know exactly what David Cameron would do to support them.

"David Cameron has refused to protect funding for schools or Sure Start over the next three years. Instead he would cut £200m each year from Sure Start - a fifth of its budget - and take support away for families on modest and middle incomes. By contrast, Labour are determined to help all families and have already opened over 3,000 Sure Start Children Centres across the country.

"David Cameron still can't explain how he would pay for a marriage tax allowance and even though research today shows tax credits play a vital role in cutting child poverty, David Cameron is set on cutting back this essential support."

Brown &Cameron Compete To Slash Spending

I am looking forward what the fightback has to offer us it is for this reason why I am voting for a Labour Government as this Government is doing a lot to help the many & not the privileged few, I would urge all comrades to join We're Backing Brown, LabourWin, Believe in Labour, At the 2010 General Election, I'm voting Labour on Facebook.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Tory leader David Cameron haggled over spending cuts while cynically backing ever-increased spending on the disastrous war in Afghanistan.

For good measure, Lib Dem Treasury spokesman Vince Cable joined in the cuts menage a trois, although taking a different line on Trident nuclear weapons.

The Conservative leader demanded even bigger public spending cuts this year.

Mr Cameron challenged Mr Brown's assertion that the biggest cuts must be delayed till after the "recovery" and then imposed over four years from 2011.

Addressing a press conference at 10 Downing Street, Mr Brown admitted that the extra cost of the Afghan war was running at £3.5 billion this year.

And he boasted that "we have raised the defence budget in real terms every year in the life of this government."

Mr Brown scolded the Tories for not spending enough on the armed forces, declaring: "You must remember that the defence budget was cut savagely under the previous Tory government."

At his press conference a few hundred yards away, Mr Cameron complained that Britain was borrowing money "at a rate of around £6,000 every second."

He parroted: "We cannot go on like this."

Mr Brown retorted a few minutes later: "Any party which is suggesting that we make huge cuts in our spending today is putting the recovery at risk."

Just across the Thames, Mr Cable told a City-friendly audience that big savings could be made through cutting Trident replacement and axing the Eurofighter and ID cards.

He demanded huge public spending cuts which would be £10bn larger than the government's plans.

And he urged "a tougher public-sector incomes policy, limiting any pay increase to a maximum £8 a week."

Labour 'To Help Brightest Youths'

Labour is promising to help up to 130,000 of the "brightest" young people from poorer families with getting to college and university.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said they would get a "structured package of support" from 2012, to help break the "glass ceiling of social mobility".

He also pledged to set up a Social Mobility Commission, to report later.

Labour says it wants to encourage top professions and universities to attract more people from deprived backgrounds.

Its proposals follow a report by former cabinet minister Alan Milburn's report saying areas like medicine and law were dominated by people from affluent families.

Labour's plans for social mobility - which would depend on it winning the general election - were part of Gordon Brown's attempts to "portray Labour as the party of aspiration".

'Denied the chance'

Meanwhile, as the two main parties battle to win the middle-class vote ahead of the election expected in May, the Conservatives are calling for teaching to become a "brazenly elitist" profession, restricted to the best graduates.

In his response to Mr Milburn's report, Mr Brown said: "My mission is to ensure that all of Britain's people, from every background, are given the opportunity to develop their talents and learn the skills which will transform their lives. And this social mobility must be rooted in our core value of fairness.

“ Gordon Brown has exhumed the idea of 'New' Labour - a label he once avoided at all costs - and unveiled his plans for a new class war ”
Nick Robinson

"In many ways society is already fairer. Six hundred thousand children have been lifted out of poverty, record numbers of our young people are going to university, one in three people of working age is a member of a profession, and the gender pay gap has narrowed.

"But we can't be a truly aspirational society if some people are still denied the chance to get on, and although we have raised the glass ceiling we have yet to break it.

"That is why our priority will be to remove all the barriers that are holding people back."

In his report, Mr Milburn said careers such as law and medicine were dominated by people from affluent backgrounds.

The "vast majority" of his 88 recommendations are being accepted by the government and the former minister will help to establish a commission to track progress.

A new forum will tell the top professions to come up with plans to widen their pool of recruits.

And a national internship service will give experience of these careers to more students and graduates.

The Conservatives have questioned why Labour has not done more to improve social mobility after 12 years in power.

BNPMember With Firearms Found Guilty

A draw of weapons found at the home of BNP member Terrance Gavan.

A BNP member who spent a decade building up a cache of weapons in a bedroom hideaway was jailed for 11 years today.

Bus driver Terrance Gavan manufactured highly dangerous firearms and explosives at the home where he lived with his mother in Batley, West Yorkshire.

Police discovered 54 improvised bombs including nail bombs and a booby-trapped cigarette packet, as well as 12 firearms.

The former soldier told detectives that he had "a fascination with things that go bang", the Old Bailey heard.

But Gavan also had a "strong hostility" towards immigrants, the court heard, and planned to target an address he had seen on a television programme that he believed was linked to the 7 July bomb attacks in London.

He told police he was a BNP member and letters to him from the party, as well as a copy of its magazine Hope and Glory, were found at his home.

The court heard that handwritten notebooks were found. One note said: "The patriot must always be ready to defend his country against enemies and their governments."

Gavan pleaded guilty to 22 counts including collecting information useful for terrorism and possessing explosives and firearms.

Tory Future

New Labour's hostility to working people and its willing role as bag carrier for the City causes many people to wonder if the Tories could be worse.

Put aside the image of the smooth-talking, grinning, well-fed faces and look at the evidence where the Tories have power, especially where a contrast with Labour is readily available.

Boris Johnson's defeat of Ken Livingstone in the London mayoral election was a disaster for working-class Londoners, but the Johnson administration also provides a clear warning of what lies in store this year if David Cameron gets the key to 10 Downing Street.

Johnson has pushed up bus and Tube fares, including for passes, by the biggest amount since Transport for London was established.

More than a third of Londoners - mainly the poorest - have no access to private transport, so they are wholly dependent on buses and Tube trains.

But, in the gospel according to Johnson, they have to pay up to compensate for the mayor's politically motivated refusal to extend the congestion zone westwards or to impose a £25 carbon tax on so-called Chelsea tractors, as Livingstone planned to do.

This is not only a graphic illustration of where the Tories stand on social justice but it also knocks into a top hat all their protestations about being concerned about the environment.

Both social justice and the environment are best served by an expanding, publicly provided, cheap, reliable and safe transport network.

The Tories have no interest in providing either. We have all been warned.

The Years Of 'Plenty' Are Over...

According to the Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg has announced that the politics of plenty are over. I assume by this he means plenty of war, plenty of cuts and plenty of sell-offs because he could not possibly be saying that up to now we have never had it so good. Or could he?

Yesterday Clegg set out to show what a serious bunch the third party can be by dropping a swath of its own policies as unrealistic. It's an interesting way to try to give people confidence in your manifesto by tearing half of it up shouting: "This is all rubbish! We were never going to do any of it."

In a press release entitled "Four steps to a fairer Britain," the Lib Dems criticised the Labour and Conservative parties for pretending the recession wasn't happening and not being prepared to take the necessary tough decisions to dig us out of this hole.

Describing the two largest parties as engaging in "make-believe economics" and failing to face up to the fact that we're living in difficult economic times is quite a staggering thing to say.

I really don't know where Clegg has been for the last year and a half, but the idea that the other parties' economic policies proffer an Aladdin's cave of giveaway policies seems a bit far-fetched.

The Labour Chancellor has, for instance, just promised the toughest spending cuts in 20 years. The Tories criticise them for not going far enough. Now Clegg wades in saying they are both sugar-coating their policies? That's actually quite frightening.

A number of commentators have described the coming general election as a turning point for a generation. That's over-hyping it.

The difference between the parties' spending plans are marginal at best. Particularly since the failed coup attempt against the Prime Minister last week, the new Labour Cabinet has shifted towards a more full-scale cuts approach that differs from the Conservative version only in that neither have been fully spelled out to the electorate.

One Lib Dem said the difference between the three main parties was that his party would "cut with a heavy heart."

Presumably that means if you're laid off you are meant to feel sorry for them. Perhaps redundant workers could send the Liberals a condolence card to commiserate with what they must have gone through sending out all those notices.

After describing voters as grown-ups, Clegg then announced that he would introduce caps on public-sector pay, scrap the government baby bonds scheme, ditch the commitment to free childcare and their "citizen's pension" and that he would no longer advocate free personal care for the old and disabled. Added to this the Lib Dems would keep tuition fees, at least until the good times roll again.

Clegg described this bonfire of the policies by saying: "We have stripped away everything that is not essential because the country cannot afford it."

There was me thinking that policies like free child and personal care existed because parents and the disabled couldn't afford them. Maybe they aren't part of "the country."

The abolition of tuition fees was seen as a defining policy for the Lib Dems and for the leader to describe this as "not essential" speaks volumes about the shift at the heart of mainstream politics.

Far from demonstrating how different the Lib Dems are from the other parties, this announcement demonstrates the tight consensus that exists at the top of all three parliamentary parties, which are determined to deny the voters any viable choice.

Clegg may think that you treat people like adults by reducing their living standards, but he could have taken a very different approach - one that stems the growing tide of unemployment rather than adds to it.

He disparagingly described long-held political commitments as a "shopping list of pledges" to voters, adding that he wasn't going to "buy their favour with cheap trinkets."

One moment it's a point of honour and principle to abolish tuition fees, the next the right to an education regardless of your wealth is a "cheap trinket." Fascinating stuff.

One less high-profile announcement was that the Lib Dems would create "a new national infrastructure bank to bring in private money to build the transport links, energy grid and public buildings we need for a sustainable, low-carbon economy in every part of Britain."

This commitment to deepen the privatisation agenda shared by the Conservatives and new Labour is another expression of how barren the state of progressive political ideas is today.

In the past many people who have leaned to the left of politics have voted Lib Dem. The party's stance on ID cards, tuition fees or opposing the Iraq invasion - until it started - gave it some appeal to those who could no longer stomach voting Labour. But even this option has gone now.

Ditching policies designed to help the poorest in society while giving big business the wink that there will be plenty of profits to be made out of a Lib Dem-influenced government is an indication that their leader's priorities are far from progressive, a fact that many on the left of the party are all too aware of.

If Clegg really wanted to be treated like a grown-up he should have taken the risk of presenting his party as a genuine political alternative, not another shade of the same failed approach.

He even dropped the idea of proportional representation at the very time that it is gaining a hearing, watering it down to a commitment to "abolish safe seats" - presumably those of his colleagues, judging by his current uninspired performance.

This approach, based on the idea that the country is moving to the right, is unlikely to win much support among Tory voters who already have a right-wing party to vote for and seems almost designed to put off those to the left who lent them their vote in previous elections.

Disaffected Labour voters and those who support smaller left-wing parties have been given a clear warning that the Lib Dems are not for them. They would do well to heed it.

Police quiz David Cameron's Pal David Ross Over 'Escort Girl Attack'

A millionaire pal of David Cameron was yesterday quizzed over a hooker's assault claims.

Carphone Warehouse co-founder David Ross, 44, was questioned by police for two hours over allegations made by Lithuanian escort girl Sniezana Kobeniak, who told officers she was invited to his home but then attacked in a row about cash.

Scotland Yard said: "We can confirm a 44-year-old man voluntarily attended a Central London police station and was interviewed under caution in relation to an allegation of assault on December 18."

Police answering a 999 call found Kobeniak, 30, with cuts and bruises outside Ross's home in Belgravia, Central London. Hours earlier Ross and girlfriend Emma Pilkington, 23, had partied with Mr Cameron and his wife Samantha. The phone tycoon has loaned the Tory leader a helicopter and given £140,000 to the party.

Emma and her former public schoolboy lover, who have denied wrongdoing to friends, were both at the house during the alleged incident.

Ross was yesterday allowed to leave the police station by a rear exit.

Half Of Tory Donations Come From City fatcats

How can anyone trust the Tory Leader David Cameron stands accused of being in the pocket of bankers as a Mirror investigation reveals his dependence on their cash.

City fatcats and their firms gave the Tories £5.9million in just the first nine months of last year - amid a financial crisis which has seen millions of workers pay the price of bankers' recklessness.

That is almost half of the £13.5million raised by Mr Cameron - and at 44% the highest proportion since the former Eton pupil became Conservative leader.

One of the biggest donors is "the godfather" of UK hedge funds Stanley Fink.

Hedge funds are investment firms blamed for fuelling the credit crunch and Mr Fink, 52, built the Man Group into the world's biggest such enterprise.

With a private fortune estimated at £118million he quit the firm last year to become Tory co-treasurer and has given the party more than £1million of his own cash.

Mr Fink has pledged to "blow Labour out of the water" by raising £40million for the election battle.

Australian ex-army officer Michael Hintze, who controls £4.5billion through the CQS hedge fund, has donated almost £1million of his estimated £250million fortune to the Tories. The party revealed he had loaned them £2.5million when the cash-for-honours scandal broke but he was never accused of any wrongdoing.

David Rowland came back from tax exile in Guernsey to help bankroll Mr Cameron's campaign.

The financier gave £1.25million last year with his "passionate concern for liberty".

City deal-maker and Christian Ken Costa runs investment bank Lazard's international arm. A church warden, he chairs the organisation that runs Alpha courses to introduce people to the faith. Mr Costa has given £163,355 to the Tories since Mr Cameron took charge, including almost £50,000 last year.

Another multi-millionaire Christian is Michael Farmer, who made his fortune by founding RK Capital Management, an Anglo-US metal-trading hedge fund. He has given the Conservatives more than £2million, including £654,000 last year.

With donations like these the Tories are set to outgun Labour's election spending by three to one. And the figures - which do not include millions from secretive backer Lord Ashcroft - make a mockery of the Tory leader's claim that he would cut reliance on wealthy donors.

In fact, donations linked to bankers and financiers made up just a quarter of the money the Tories received in 2008, when they gave £4.2million of the £16.4million pouring in to party coffers.

In the two years before that, bankers gave £5.5million, or 30%, of the £18.7million raised in 2007 and £6.2million, or 35%, of the £17.7million pulled in during 2006 - Mr Cameron's first full year in charge.

Labour MP Andy Slaughter will fight the new Hammersmith seat in West London, where his Tory opponent has been bankrolled by Caroline Nash, the wife of City fatcat John Nash.

Mr Slaughter pointed out: "These donations from a host of fatcats show just how cosily the Tories are nestled in the back pockets of rich bankers. These people simply don't give something for nothing.

"People will be rightly suspicious when they see the people trying to buy influence.

"It's no wonder Cameron is so committed to scrapping the 50p tax rate for the super-rich - and cutting inheritance tax for the richest 3,000 families - when his party's cash flow is so dependent on keeping rich bankers happy." The Tory leader kickstarted his election campaign with a £500,000 billboard blitz this week - four months before the election, almost certain to be on May 6.

Ex-Home Secretary David Blunkett, who is spearheading a Labour fundraising drive, yesterday admitted his cash-strapped party cannot compete financially with the fatcat-backed Tories.

A meeting of the National Policy Forum to thrash out the manifesto had to be scrapped on cost grounds and Mr Blunkett admitted to The Times: "We are trying to be careful so we do not end up bankrupt after the election if this all goes pear-shaped."

Labour has a campaign budget of around £8million. The Tories, meanwhile, are expected to raise £25million.

A legal limit on parties' election spending has been set at about £18million but local parliamentary candidates can spend up to £40,000.

The Mirror recently revealed how Tory cash has been channelled into key marginal seats from central funds in an operation overseen by Lord Ashcroft. Last night the Tories claimed to be receiving donations "from an increasingly wide base". A spokesman said: Our base of donors is widening all the time - unlike Labour who are really almost exclusively reliant on trade union cash."

FINK

Quit Man Group to be Tories' co-treasurer. Has given £1m of own cash.

HINTZE

Controls £4.5bn hedge fund. Given almost £1m, worth an estimated £250m.

ROWLAND

Back from tax exile and donated £1.25m to the Tories last year.