Better Together, PIP PIP and Starmer’s Truskian Turn
Today Keir Starmer announced that he was abolishing NHS England, explaining: “We knew before we came into government that things would be bad…what we discovered was that things were far worse.” You and me both mate. I had assumed that Labour would be a sort of hollow shell, a party that had sold its soul long ago and was now a project triangulated into oblivion, whose sole purpose was electoral gain. But as the Prime Minister himself said: “what we discovered was that things were far worse.”
The announcement of axing NHS England followed quickly after the announcement of major cuts to disability benefits and that old euphemism, ‘welfare reform,’ moves endorsed by Scotland’s Politician of the Year, Anas Sarwar.
The clubbable commentariat are buying right into it, though. John Rentoul at The Independent pens an enthusiastic eulogy telling us “How the new steely Starmer is attacking welfare” and how “sensible Tories think that Starmer is going to win the next election”.
I don’t want to burst your bubble John, but the ‘next election’ is at Holyrood.
Yesterday the Mirror published polling showing that two thirds of the public (63%) support a wealth tax on those who have over £10m.
And despite the relentless Tory framing of the problems in the economy and in society there are ready-made solutions to hand.
Tax Justice UK offers the following solutions:
Apply a 2% tax on assets over £10 million, to raise up to £24 billion a year
“A wealth tax on assets exceeding £10 million would require individuals with total wealth above this threshold to pay a 2% tax on the excess amount. It could raise £24 billion a year. Setting this tax at a high threshold of £10 million in assets would ensure that only a tiny proportion of the population are impacted – just 0.04%, or 20,000 people – yet would raise significant funds for our public services. These are some of the UK’s wealthiest people, who possess a diversity of assets. This means they would be able to pay without having to sell property or experiencing a significant change in their financial situation. The relatively small number of people impacted would also make this tax much easier for HMRC to administer. This change would ensure that people who have benefited enormously from economic changes and inherited wealth pay their fair share.”
You can read their ten other proposals here How to raise £60 billion for public services: our ten tax reforms.
So the choice couldn’t be any clearer. Do you push 700,000 people into poverty by cutting lifeline benefits? Or do you get a grip on the extreme wealth being hoarded in this country? That’s the choice supported by Anas Sarwar.
As Adam Bienkov from ByLine Times says: “Keir Starmer repeatedly insists that “we’re not returning to austerity” shortly after setting out his plans for billions of pounds in cuts to public sector jobs and benefits.”
Even the normally loyal Guardian has turned penning an editorial saying (The Guardian view on Labour’s welfare plans: betraying the vulnerable): “Labour party in power might have been expected to defend the poorest and most vulnerable in society. No longer, it seems. Sir Keir Starmer’s government, inheriting a flatlining economy and self-imposed fiscal constraints, has chosen to balance the books on the backs of disabled people.”
All of this seems very Truskian and desperate. Now, there’s a new AI element thrown into the strange mix of late populist fervour:
🚨 NEW: Keir Starmer will tomorrow announce that AI will replace the work of civil servants if it can do a better job
The approach will be guided by the mantra: “No person’s substantive time should be spent on a task where digital or AI can do it better, quicker & to the same…
— Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) March 12, 2025
Beyond all of this the idea that Britain is bankrupt needs to be questioned. John Hammill points out:
“Keir Starmer and Labour say Britain can’t afford to look after the Disabled but can afford to pay people tens of thousands for doing nothing in the House of Lords.” #DisabilityBenefits
As if completing the Holy Trinity of slashing the public sector – and embracing big tech and AI as a saviour – the Starmer government wraps it all up with some patriotic fervour: “This Labour government is making the state work for working people.”
Now, this may all play out well in Morgan McSweeney’s focus groups, but it really will be the death knell for Scottish Labour who are now strapped to the mast of the good ship Austerity. Of course, all of this designed to fend off the major inroads that Reform UK is making in both Labour and Conservative votes in England, but the consequences for this in Scotland, as Rentoul reveals, aren’t even being considered.
Please donate & share:
Backing Bella Caledonia 2025 – a Creative & Arts crowdfunding project
We are supported only by our readers. We don't have corporate backers and we don't take advertising, so we rely entirely on your support.
Help to support independent Scottish journalism
Labour’s slogan ” Fixing the state ….for Working People .” ignores those who don’t work , whether they be pensioners , the sick , the disabled etc…
Do they not count in Starmer’s Labour UK ?
Is this the ” Change” that he and his Party chanted endlessly during the election ? Producing a country where those who work ( hard ? ) are to be the recipients of Labour’s largesse while the rest can go f…… themselves ?
trouble is so many folk end up sick &/or disabled through having worked themselves to the bone, the vicious circle capitalist cnts are so keen on, if only we could invent a bomb that taen oot a’ the ars*holes in a oner whilst sparing folk that are at least good craic, I am working on it like
YES.
If you had a wealth tax of 2% per year on all savings, investments, pension funds and property with a combined worth of more than £500,000 the government income would be far, far greater. Does the £10MM figure come from something like penis envy? And not detailing what constitutes this £10MM is lazy. Why not tax wealthy middle class people as well? If you don’t do that it’s not a wealth tax at all.
I just had a brief read of the wealthtax.uk report hyperlinked in the article. It starts at £250,000, not £10MM. It also involves sending what would be a whole lot of people out to value home contents (although if you have a Picasso, it’s exempt, but I think a car isn’t).
Richard Murphy argues that there are many better ways to tax the wealthy than a wealth tax, but taxing the wealthy is very clearly what we should be doing.
Starmer and Labour lacked any fundamental ideas and were only voted in partly due to unpopularity of Tories and partly due to vagaries of Westminster electoral system.
The tin eared Rachel Reeves made some serious missteps at first budget and their popularity and economy plummeted.
Lacking any coherent strategy Starmer (McSweeney) are flailing around and selecting policies from elsewhere on a pick and mix basis. Meanwhile Reeves lack of any real strategy and innate fiscal conservatism is frankly making things worse for both society and the government with a proposed new round of austerity.
In short they has a pretty poor hand when they came into power but have played it badly.
Exactly so!