Just over one week to go. I have posted my analysis of the Tory party manifesto… next up is the Lib-Dems.
If you’ve been following the election coverage you’ve probably believe that the Liberal democrats are the anti-Iraq war party, the most left of the big three and the party straight about tax. Is that true? Find out by reading the full manifesto here, http://mobular.onlinedm.com/libdems/manifesto/england/, or read my take on it below.
Before I write my take, it’s important to note that this is a little harder than the Tory manifesto – first, it isn’t written in tabloid English, and, second, it actually has a complete set of proposals, both that explicitly compliment current Labour policies and those that challenge them. The Tory party manifesto is made up of a bunch of fairly feeble statements focusing on a range of fairly minor issues… just a reminder to be diligent against Howard and his Aussie (or should I say immigrant) labour…
The Lib-Dem manifesto is a leaf short of 40 pages and packs a lot of information in it. The general gist is not too dissimilar to the Tories approach – overall acceptance of the Blair-Brown consensus, with a tweaking approach. Unlike the Tories, the Lib-Dems’ tweaks include some big ideas. I highlight what I think are the big ideas here:
- the war – first, they wouldn’t have gone in at all, and second they want to set a timetable (guided by the UN) to get us out.
- Tax – the thing you’ll have heard is about placing a 50% tax on earnings over £100,000/year and you might have heard their plan to scrap Council Tax and introduce a local income tax – both in my mind eminently sensible…if only it were that easy and would have no negative externalities. But what is also interesting about the Lib-Dem tax approach is its real challenge to Labour’s ‘stealth taxes’. The Lib-Dems argue Brown has made the tax system more complicated, more bureaucratic, and ultimately more costly to manage. The Liberals would streamline taxes – supposedly. The lack of detail here is a missed opportunity.
- Their education proposals look bold, but I am not convinced by the possibility of meeting all their commitments. E.g. they have a commitment to recruit 21,000 new early years teachers to reduce class sized – good idea, but where are the teachers to come from? It’s been hard enough to raise the number of teachers under Labour in the last eight years and teacher salaries have increased massively. Also this policy will be funded by scrapping Labour’s Child Trust Fund – a policy that is more likely to have a greater impact to reducing inequality; cash in people’s hand. Their big, realistic, idea for education is their acceptance of the recent Tomlinson recommendations that would scrap GCSE’s and A-Levels and provide us with a unified 14-19 education system.
- They have proposals reducing the prison burden by not putting low-level, non-violent criminals into prison, but giving them ‘tough’ community work. The use of the word ‘tough’ is clearly a pander to those who think shitting on criminals makes society better. It is indicative of a party who still doesn’t read the electorate particularly well or perhaps a party that is trying to get both Tory and Labour votes.
- The Lib-Dems would scrap the DTI as part of a slash and burn approach to business regulation and ‘red-tape’. This is the only point where the liberal democrats resemble their Liberal heritage of the pre-first world war era.
- Interestingly, by cutting red-tape they would introduce a legal duty on all to trade fairly – sounds like a brilliant idea, but what does this mean in practice, how will it be enforced and what will be the bureaucratic load? They imply that supermarkets that push farmers prices down would fall foul of this fair trade law – sounds good, but again the lack of detail is woeful.
- For both the business and public sector the inspectorates would be rationalised and slimmed down – a positive vision as part of a less-regulated society and one that encourages and supports local autonomy and democracy.
- Scrap the Child Support Agency and hand its functions to the Inland Revenue – thought that was interesting, not sure of the impact.
- Their foreign and international policy is credible - Lib-Dems would work to eliminate nuclear weapon and lead for reform in the WTO, IMF and World Bank. Of course the Lib-Dems are pro Europe too.
- Scrap Vehicle and Excise Duty (road tax) and replace with a targeted tax that would weigh against you if you have a high polluting car, are in areas of good public transport and the traffic on the roads. They also support the widening of congestion charging, which was apparently their idea in the first place!
- They have a very strong green theme and have Green considerations on each page they explore how their policies can support a more environmentally conscious approach.
They are most eloquent in the last section entitled ‘Stop the Abuse of Power’. Shirley Williams’ waxes lyrical about Blair’s arrogant abuse of power, the mess of the House of Lords, the anti-democratic nature of the Labour government and its centralising tendencies. The Lib-Dems have a set of policies that would reinvigorate local democracy. However, even the Lib-Dems will not re-fuel the increasing democratic disengagement, which I believe is more about the impact of globalisation turning democracy into a contest of the best manager, rather than a contest of the ideas that inspire us to believe they will make society better – don’t be fooled by those who blame disengagement on postmodernism, blame the supremacy of multinationals.
Whilst on the power of MNCs, I was disappointed by one thing I didn’t read… there was no challenge to Labour’s public finance initiative or public-private-partnerships or Labour’s commitment to privatisation, whether it part or whole. It seems that these policies are here to stay and that they will ever more creep into the service end delivery of healthcare and education. Thereby compromising the public service ethic and fixing future Governments to pay high interest debts due to the blind faith in the private sector.
Overall, however, the Lib-Dems offer an impressive package. But despite their strengths – presenting an effective balance between liberalism and social-democracy – they are the Lib-Dems after all. Yes, the party led by Mr Kennedy, the party that have to sit out of harms way in the House of Commons, the party that will not get into power in 2005. Theirs is the manifesto unrestrained by the real prospect of Westminster power. With all their strengths there is something missing. Voting for the Lib-Dems there is no lure of power, only the boredom of tactics.
Up next will be the Labour party manifesto summary – the 120+ page manifesto – hopefully with no homoerotic photos of Blair and Brown…
