Author Archives: Andrew Chandler

Sick man of Europe, again: welfare, work and Britain’s dilemma

In the 1970s, Britain was called the sick man of Europe. Years later, that sick man has returned; with its withered cane. This time, however, it comes to us in sickness benefits (a cruel irony); having ballooned 25% since 2019. Some chalk it up to COVID’s long shadow. However, our European counterparts, who also endured the pandemic and post-recovery, have not seen the same rise in welfare. This suggests why some circles are calling it a “British disease”.

Rachel Reeves’, boxed in by her fiscal rules, is staring down a £9bn hole. A hole that might come from welfare cuts. Labour ministers are proclaiming that people are “gaming the system”.

Now, bad actors exist. I’ve no doubt there are people who cheat the system – I saw this as a Housing Officer. But also during that period, I saw the vast majority of sickness benefit claims were done in good faith. A recent example, I recently spoke to a man who had worked for decades as a Health & Safety Lead and Warehouse Operator for a supermarket. The stroke took that away from him. His employer, despite years of service, couldn’t make meaningful adjustments to keep him on. But he still had his Personal Independence Payment (PIP) to shelter him. If it was not for PIP, the stroke would have been the least of his problems – he remarked. This is why we have a safety net. It suggests to me that businesses aren’t doing enough in making adjustments. If we are going to win on Social Security then we need to also win on Job Security.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged and | 21 Comments

Trump, Zelensky and the White Paper of our time

Embed from Getty Images

The images from the Oval Office were grotesque. Donald Trump, a man who prides himself on his ability to “make deals,” sat across from a beleaguered Volodymyr Zelensky and did what can only be described as political hazing. Instead of offering assurances of support, Trump harangued and hounded the Ukrainian president, all while dangling an exploitative mineral deal before him — one that offers no security guarantees, only the faint scent of transactionalism masquerading as diplomacy.

It was a moment that should chill anyone with a passing knowledge of history. Because what we witnessed wasn’t just another Trumpian tantrum; it was the re-run of an old, dark playbook. The optics of Trump cosying up to Putin’s interests at Ukraine’s expense are hauntingly reminiscent of the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Stalin, with all his paranoid cunning, believed that Hitler’s outstretched hand was one of good faith — or at least mutual self-interest. He was wrong. Hitler, never one to honour a deal longer than it served him, turned on the Soviet Union with all the fury of a betrayed beast. The lesson? Dictators do not negotiate in good faith, and deals with devils have expiry dates written in invisible ink.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged , and | 19 Comments

We need to be ambitious on planning and housing – while telling uncomfortable truths

Now that the election is over, and we have successfully made inroads into the Conservative Blue Wall, it’s time to reflect and learn from our past. Moving forward, it’s crucial that we balance our national progressive platform with the needs of our Blue Wall constituents. We must navigate this balance with confidence, avoiding the pitfalls of timidity that have hindered us in the past. In a landscape marked by fragmented politics and widespread distrust, we can’t afford to be complacent.

Our victories in this election were not isolated as an endorsement alone but were also influenced by a split on the right. It poses a threat for us. People have an appetite to “shake-up” the system feeling that, for years, Governments have neglected issues like housing, development and infrastructure. We need to be mindful of the rising threat of far-right politics, which often scapegoats marginal groups instead of addressing the real issues. The performances of parties like Reform and the lukewarm vote share for Labour highlight the concerns of many communities. These communities feel “threatened,” suffer from managed decline, and lack regeneration. It’s our duty to ensure that the gains we’ve made in the Blue Wall, while substantiated, also remains meaningful and sometimes brave.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged and | 30 Comments

How I spent Polling Day

During a very long and miserable campaign by both Labour and the Tories, we Liberal Democrats had to resort to some pretty inventive campaign stunts to grab national attention. These efforts  aimed to inject some much-needed positivity into the campaign.

Finally, Election Day arrived, A momentous occasion where the collective voices of millions shape our nation’s future. Where employees (the politicians) meet their managers for their performance review and interviews (the voters). This is my election diary.

Morning:

I was jolted awake by my dad’s cat, whom I am currently looking after.  Begrudgingly, I got out of bed and fed her her second meal of the morning. To unwind, I turned on the news, played some music, and tidied up my dad’s house. The day felt sluggish, and the anticipation of the election results only made time crawl slower. I couldn’t wait for the government to change.

Afternoon:

Feeling restless, I ventured out for a long walk to my local polling station. On my way back, I chatted with various people.  I noticed a concerning trend: many in Stoke-on-Trent Central were planning to vote for Reform UK. Discussions often centred on Farage’s rhetoric about the NHS, immigration, and “woke culture.”

Stoke has a troubling history with far-right politics, having seen the BNP hold council seats and UKIP’s Paul Nuttall come second in the 2016 by-election. Despite its low immigrant population, people feel threatened by immigration.  Stoke’s managed decline since the 1980s of poverty, drug addiction, inadequate housing, and council mismanagement is evident. Unlike Liverpool or Manchester, it hasn’t seen significant regeneration. I remember a local headline from my teenage years promising EU-funded regeneration that never materialised. It worries me that Reform UK’s divisive politics are gaining traction here.

Back home, I recorded a few videos and decided what to wear for the count.

Evening: Voting

I arrived at the polling station, where a clerk reminded me to have my ID ready. I confidently reached into my pocket, only to realise I’d left it at home. Embarrassed, I raced back to fetch it.

10 pm: Exit Poll

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged and | Leave a comment

Neglected Assets: A case for a radical rebalancing and reform of our Tax System

In a twist worthy of a Shakespearean comedy, The Financial Times—yes, the very bastion of capitalism—has thrown its weight behind the call to increase taxes on the wealthy. It’s as if Ebenezer Scrooge himself woke up, not just offering Bob Cratchit Christmas off, but also turned his business into a consumer mutual. 

This surprising endorsement underscores a deeper, more troubling reality: the Tories have, over time, alienated their once staunchest supporters — pragmatic economic thinkers and investors. The people who’d toast their morning coffee to the Conservatives, secure in the knowledge that their financial acumen was reflected in sound government policy. 

However, even the FT don’t try to hoodwink their audience against their own interests; understanding the reality of how years of economic stagnation has impacted our country and the wealth imbalance. 

The Tories have managed to estrange themselves so far from these stakeholders, pushing them away with a series of economic imbalances that act more like tragicomedies than strategy. Gone are the days when Tories  were seen as reliable economic stewards. 

The Tories seem intent on peddling narrow, faux-capitalistic dogma than fostering real, sustainable growth. The FT would appear to not be as easily fooled. They understand that the economy needs careful tending, like a well-pruned garden, not the reckless abandonment of letting a child  loose with garden shears. 

The article claims that parties need to the bolder on the economy. Now you might think, bold from FT writers, we’ve all been here before; savage tax cuts, privatising the police force, parading with “We Love Liz” t-shirts and having a national “Margaret Thatcher day”. Except no. Instead, amongst many other arguments, the article states that arguments by the right that better economic rebalancing and higher taxes will impact the economy is just nonsense. They say that due to the state of public finances and a public interest to see robust investment into public services that we need to be honest about increasing taxes if we are going to prevent going through a cliff-edge. They have even argued that due to lack of private investment that it would be in our interest if a major re-balancing of wealth in this country through a series of targeted tax rises on the wealthy be implemented as the government can efficiency invest into the economy. The extreme position the Tories have left us in means we have no major infrastructure going on in the UK – the need is obvious. 

While it stop short of calls for any kind of Wealth Tax or increasing top earners’ tax rates it, the author argues that we should be looking at reforming our overly complex tax system which courts the favour of people with big pockets and good accountants. Amongst its arguments was  using revenue to bring VAT down and combining NI and Income Tax together. 

I have always been a strong advocate of reforming our tax systems.  The current tax system is deeply unfair where wealthy individuals who make their earnings by selling assets pay less tax than someone who is on a paid salary but earning considerably less. 

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged , , and | 21 Comments

ITV debate is an insult to democracy

In a recent announcement, Conservative leader Rishi Sunak and Labour leader Keir Starmer have agreed to participate in a head-to-head televised debate on ITV. While it’s always good to be able to get that prime-time real estate during an election campaign, that reaches a wider audience and encourages healthy exercise in democratic engagement, the lack of mention of third-party participation from such a debate is not just an oversight; it is a deliberate slight against democratic diversity and civic participation.

It’s like organizing a dance-off and only inviting two dancers – talk about a political two-step with no room for a …

Posted in Op-eds | 16 Comments

A case for radical pragmatic ideas

During my book-hunting escapades, I stumbled upon Harold MacMillan’s “The Middle Way.” Its weathered cover, nestled among forgotten tomes, bore striking images: Mussolini’s Fascist emblem and the Soviet hammer with sickle; symbols of Europe’s political divide in 1938. Between them, the book’s title, “Middle Way,” almost asking politely: “Do things have to be this way?” The lack of evocative symbol of its own hints at thoughtful ideas contained within its pages. Intrigued, I purchased it, eager to explore its ideas before the rain set in.

If some of your readers are familiar with my previous (and first) blog entry, where I discussed Harold Wilson and his purported working-class persona, you might remember I discussed the stark contrast between his political imagination and his lifestyle reality. Just as Wilson’s persona was far removed from true working-class experiences that that of Del Boy, Harold MacMillan’s aristocratic lifestyle would fit more kindly in Hyacinth Bucket’s aspirations.

Yet, it was the devil in the detail from his book that surprised me: how strikingly compassionate and concerned about the lack of social coalescence.

His book doesn’t present itself as a warning about how too much government would lead to the formation of regimes and their state apparatus. Instead, if anything, he argues how too little government creates conditions that help extremists prey onto an unsuspecting public. In his book he calls it a study rather than a philosophy, “The Middle Way: A Study of The Problems of Economic and Social Progress in a Free and Democratic World”. The word study is rather methodical but doesn’t go too far for being called abstract.

MacMillan’s assertion of the need for a more interventionist government role is equally crucial in a free society. He advocated for pragmatic, evidence-based approaches, clear-sighted good sense; even going so far as to call for nationalization where market failures we’re evident or private interest was incompatible to public interest.

I noticed quickly upon joining as a new member that we LibDems come in all political colours. While critics may argue that this diversity muddies the Party’s image, painting it as too broad a church, wishy-washy, colourless, and just a bit ‘meh’; we centre our values on personal freedom and liberty. I always found the words “freedom” and “liberty” can be misleading sometimes. I often found its use, by extension, as the establishment’s way to excuse our collective responsibility. The freedom of choice is only as convenient if people have the economic resources needed to fully participate. The freedom from: social injustice, poverty, inequality etc. The “freedom to” is needed for a just society, but in cohabitation with the “freedom from” narrative.

So how could we envision this? Here is a list of a few ideas and thought experiments that I had in mind to share in this discussion.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged | 21 Comments

Labour’s turmoil presents the LibDems as the home for those with centre-left progressive values

Embed from Getty Images

Quoting Labour’s Harold Wilson might stir some feathers to our LibDem audience, but amidst the political whirlwind, it’s fitting to recall our famous working man’s pipe-smoking ex-Prime Minister who seemed to be born into a trench-coat, rather than a birthday suit. His famous quip was “a week is a long time in politics.” And my goodness, what a week it has been.

We witnessed Natalie Elphicke, one of three former Conservatives who have recently joined Labour. Whilst the previous two defections might have surprised some and been welcomed by all within Labour, Elphicke’s departure was one that surprised everyone and was not welcomed by some from within Labour. Honestly, if you had asked me personally, I would have put better bets on her throwing herself into the coast in her constituency in Dover, to help toe a boat of Refugees onto British shores, than this. We are still yet to see the full political fallout of this choice accepted by Labour, given her right-wing views on immigration, culture wars, and, not too long ago, unflattering remarks she made about the Labour leadership. And this is only scratching the surface, given the comments she made about her husband’s victims that got caught up in his sexual misconduct trial and her attempts to influence it.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged , , and | 32 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Simon R
    It's nice to see an attempt to not just suggest a policy but think through in detail how it could be implemented and how much it would cost. But @Mike Pete...
  • Steve Trevethan
    Thank you for a most interesting article. What is to stop paying N.H. S. staff decent attractive pay and making sure that they enjoy their work (mostly) with...
  • Craig Levene
    Nobody at moment Denis. Those who talk about AOC or Newsom just goes to show how detached the Dem party is from reality. They only have themselves to blame for...
  • Mick Taylor
    Unfettered capitalism -of the sort Donald Trump gavour - is not good for workers or consumers. This was recognised even by Adam Smith, who whilst thinking capit...
  • Denis Loretto
    Who is the leader or even potential leader of the Democrats? What prospect is there of their putting together an inspiring campaign? Is their only hope a fall-a...