Labour’s odd messaging: how the party was for reversing Coalition cuts before it was against them

Mark Pack has already highlighted the pitfalls of political opponents commentating on other parties’ conferences. And he’s right of course. But it didn’t stop him, so I won’t let it stop me…

I am genuinely puzzled by Labour’s key messages based on the first two days of their conference. Day 1 kicked off with the Big Announcment by Ed Miliband that Labour is now committed to doubling tuition fees (dressed up as only The Observer could as Labour committing to ‘slashing’ fees).

Regardless of what you think about the policy, and I think I’ve made my views clear enough, the headline message generated for the normal news-glancing voter is this: Labour will increase taxes (on the rich and on banks) to pay for increased public spending (on students).

In one sense, this is fair enough. it’s the kind of policy move you might expect of Labour (even if, as in this case, the prime beneficiaries are well-off graduates in a decade’s time).

But then Day 2 arrives, and what’s Labour’s main message now? That the party can be trusted with the economy again because Labour won’t commit to reversing the Coalition’s cuts. Attack them? Yes, naturally. But oppose them? No. Here is the clarion call of the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls:

“No matter how much we dislike particular Tory spending cuts or tax rises, we can’t make promises now to reverse them. I’m clear that I won’t do that and neither will any of my Shadow Cabinet colleagues.”

So let me recap to avoid any confusion… Day 1: Labour proposes to reverse (partially) a Coaltion cut through tax rises. Day 2: Labour vows not to reverse Coalition cuts.

My point here is less about the policies and whether you agree with them. I don’t, but then I’m in a different political party and won’t vote Labour at the next election, so I’m hardly Messrs Miliband’s and Balls’ target audience. What surprises me is that Labour should send out such mixed signals within 24 hours, that their two key messages should cancel each other out.

It’s all too easy to get caught up in the conference bubble — because thousands of delegates are hanging on your every word, you imagine the general public is, too. Then you watch a news bulletin and realise how it all sounds to the outside world.

Read more by or more about , , , , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Paul Holmes
    When I was an MP I remember being shown a block of Council flats in London. We stood on a first floor walkway and my guide pointed to one door that after RtBuy ...
  • Paul Holmes
    AlexB - Housing Associations already have the power to borrow money against their assets, which are of course not subject to the wholesale Right to Buy (at huge...
  • David McHardy
    There is no way out of the housing crisis without mass private building. Private building has stalled because it is unprofitable, as this article explains. This...
  • George Thomas
    "Of course, devolution cannot simply mean moving responsibilities without resources. Local leaders need meaningful fiscal powers, long-term funding settlements ...
  • George Thomas
    Greater devolution without greater funding is a poisoned chalice and that is what's being offered in Wales. That and sly digs at the Senedd. Then it leads t...