[OccupyCU] Fw: [socialistdiscussion] Labour Party moves right to catch votes

[David Johnson]

Britian seems to have the same problem as we have here in the U.S. with sell out politicians who favor the corporate special interests and ignore the will and welfare of the people.

David J.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Ed Bober 
To: socialistdiscussion at yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 5:37 AM
Subject: Re: [socialistdiscussion] Labour Party moves right to catch votes


  

Dan

Thanks for this information. As you imply in your first sentence, the Labour leaders themselves have greatly contributed to this slide of public opinion because they refuse to debate any of these issues. Instead they just adapt to the prevailing Tory policies, which gives the mass of working people the impression that cuts are the only solution. Nevertheless, in street activity I am often struck by how much potential there is for change in public opinion. People are pleased to see even a small local group pushing anti-austerity ideas. We had a static demo outside the ATOS building in Norwich yesterday on a busy street. Hundreds of motorists were beeping their horns in support. This is precisely over the question of opposition to benefit cuts.

We are losing the war at the moment. But the Tory and Liberal government are not winning the battle for hearts and minds in any profound sense. 

Will Labour win the next election? Anyone who claims to know for certain is probably a charlatan. But the UKIP vote could be the most unpredictable factor. They probably will be seen as the party for a protest vote. There is deep hostility towards the political establishment (where, as you say the differences between politicians are getting smaller) – this will of course split the Conservative vote. UKIP may draw some non-voters back to the polls. However, it is hard to imagine that UKIP will not also dent the Labour vote. And amongst those young who sense that UKIP are out of touch and have no solution, there is little inclination to vote Labour, they are more likely to abstain or possibly vote Green.

Ed

From: Dan 
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 10:58 AM
To: socialistdiscussion at yahoogroups.com 
Subject: [socialistdiscussion] Labour Party moves right to catch votes

  
The British Labour Party continues to retreat from basic principles with the leadership's threats to make budget cuts and cap welfare payments if it wins the next election. In this they are following in the footsteps of the present coalition government. Any differences between the three (four?) major parties are getting smaller.

But does such an approach necessarily mean that Labour cannot win the next general election? The LP already has a good, not a huge, lead over the Tories in recent opinion polls. But surely further attacks on welfare will cut into their lead? 

Not necessarily. The latest survey on Social Attitudes paints a gloomy picture of the general public's views on the welfare state in this time of austerity. I was speaking to an engineering worker last week, a good solid union member, who railed against the unemployed, who he saw as parasites living off his taxes, saying that the dole should be cut and that anyone who wanted to could find work.

"... there are reasons to predict that opinion has not followed the pattern of previous recessions, because the public - under the long-term influence of Labour's stance as well as that of the current coalition - has embraced a more tough-minded view of welfare than it held in the past"

"... Replies to our question suggest that the proportions thinking that employers or individuals themselves or their families should be responsible for ensuring sufficient retirement income have increased somewhat over time. More than one in three (35 per cent) say individuals and families should take the main responsibility, while around one in ten (11 per cent) point towards the person's employer. More strikingly, when it comes to support for the unemployed, one in three (33 per cent) think the individual or their family should mainly be responsible, compared with one in ten (10 per cent) who thought this in 1998."

"... in 2010 just three in ten respondents recommended an increase in taxation and spending, which was only half the proportion who did so as recently as 2002. "

Slightly more differentiated was the view on welfare for the poor even if this leads to higher taxes:
"...Almost three in ten (28 per cent) think the government should spend more, while four in ten (39 per cent) disagree with the idea. More than one in three (32 per cent) neither agree nor disagree - demonstrating that it is certainly not the case that most people have a clear view on this issue. "

But on benefits for the disabled, the massive press campaigns about "scroungers" and fakes has produced its desired effect:
"... support for extra spending on benefits for disabled people who cannot work has fallen by 21 percentage points since 1998 and by 10 percentage points in the last three years."

And there is a large number of people who think that unemployed benefits are too high:
"... Following the recession of the early-1980s, when unemployment stood at 11 per cent, a minority of just over one in three (35 per cent) took the view that benefits for unemployed people were too high and discouraged them from finding jobs. By the early-1990s recession, the proportion expressing this view had declined to a quarter (24 per cent in 1993 - when unemployment stood at more than 10 per cent). But adherence to this view then rose steadily from the late-1990s, to a point where almost two-thirds (62 per cent) of the public takes this view today."

The survey of social attitudes has probably had a signal effect on the Labour Party's swing to the right; it matches the hardening of views in the general population. 

Dan

MORE on this and Immigration etc: http://www.bsa-29.natcen.ac.uk/read-the-report/welfare/introduction.aspx




__._,_.___Reply via web post  Reply to sender  Reply to group  Start a New Topic  Messages in this topic (2)  

Recent Activity: 
Visit Your Group 
 Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback .
 
__,_._,___
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/occupycu/attachments/20130608/b077874b/attachment.html>