Envy is not attractive; aspiration is not a dirty word
I've got nothing against toffs. I don't believe in class war; enemies of the people exist only in the fantasies of extremists; envy is not attractive and aspiration is not a dirty word.
It's remarkable that these truths are no longer regarded as self-evident. When David Cameron says that it's not where we've come from that matters - it's where we're going, he's not wrong.
But it is reasonable to be troubled by the fact that the Conservative shadow cabinet is dominated by multi-millionaires, the landed gentry and old Etonians. Such disquiet has nothing whatsoever to do with envy or resentment, and is everything to do with the representative nature of our politics.
Afterall, how can they get what life's like for the vast majority of us? And if they can't - and I really don't see how they can - how on earth can they represent us and take decisions in our best interests?
How can George Osborne get what it?s like to face unemployment and surviving on benefits when from day one he was destined to inherit his family's centuries-old, multi-million pound wallpaper business?
Has David Cameron, a direct descendent of Queen Victoria's uncle, ever had to worry about choosing between heating the house and putting food on the table?
As far as I know, the Conservative Housing spokesman Grant Shapps, the proprietor of a multi-million pound printing firm, has never had to experience the threat of repossession or life on a never-ending council house waiting list, in which sharing a bedroom with two siblings while his parent sleeps on the sitting room floor in an overcrowded flat is daily life.
And how astonishing is it that that someone like Zac Goldsmith, who aspires to set the taxes you and I pay, sees no problem in himself being "non dom" for tax purposes?
So the Conservatives have questions to answer, but they don't concern Eton. The real question to pose should be: is aspiration really encouraged and rewarded by tax cuts for the richest 3%? If you believe it is you?re a Conservative. If you believe tax cuts start from the bottom up you?re a progressive and Labour remains your natural home.
Labour has endured a bruising two years - and too much of the damage done has been self-inflicted. So I understand why the class war, Tory toffs, bash the bankers rhetoric puts a smile on the face of the more partisan Labour activist. But it makes me want to hide under a table. Here's why: According to the polls Labour is holding on to barely 60% of those who voted for us in 2005. This toff rhetoric sends these lost voters running for the hills because it is the exact opposite of why they returned to Labour in the first place. They supported us because we were a healthy, outgoing, positive and optimistic Labour Party that wants to help those who want to do better. Labour is rightly the party for those struggling to get by; but we must also remain the party for those who want to get on.
I grew up on a housing estate and was raised close to the area I'm seeking to represent. I come from a working class family - my Mum stacked shelves in Boots for 25 years and my dad was a dustman. They wanted more for me than they had for themselves, encouraged me to do well at school and - 25 years later, I've got a great job and a standard of living they never had a chance of themselves. That's what's great about Britain. To see those chances shared out more widely and equitably is why I'm in politics. It's why the Labour Party exists and it stands in opposition to the instincts and outlook of the Conservatives. So as a progressive, yes, I want the richest 1% of British people shouldering 23% of tax revenue. But let's not call them names while they're doing it.
It's remarkable that these truths are no longer regarded as self-evident. When David Cameron says that it's not where we've come from that matters - it's where we're going, he's not wrong.
But it is reasonable to be troubled by the fact that the Conservative shadow cabinet is dominated by multi-millionaires, the landed gentry and old Etonians. Such disquiet has nothing whatsoever to do with envy or resentment, and is everything to do with the representative nature of our politics.
Afterall, how can they get what life's like for the vast majority of us? And if they can't - and I really don't see how they can - how on earth can they represent us and take decisions in our best interests?
How can George Osborne get what it?s like to face unemployment and surviving on benefits when from day one he was destined to inherit his family's centuries-old, multi-million pound wallpaper business?
Has David Cameron, a direct descendent of Queen Victoria's uncle, ever had to worry about choosing between heating the house and putting food on the table?
As far as I know, the Conservative Housing spokesman Grant Shapps, the proprietor of a multi-million pound printing firm, has never had to experience the threat of repossession or life on a never-ending council house waiting list, in which sharing a bedroom with two siblings while his parent sleeps on the sitting room floor in an overcrowded flat is daily life.
And how astonishing is it that that someone like Zac Goldsmith, who aspires to set the taxes you and I pay, sees no problem in himself being "non dom" for tax purposes?
So the Conservatives have questions to answer, but they don't concern Eton. The real question to pose should be: is aspiration really encouraged and rewarded by tax cuts for the richest 3%? If you believe it is you?re a Conservative. If you believe tax cuts start from the bottom up you?re a progressive and Labour remains your natural home.
Labour has endured a bruising two years - and too much of the damage done has been self-inflicted. So I understand why the class war, Tory toffs, bash the bankers rhetoric puts a smile on the face of the more partisan Labour activist. But it makes me want to hide under a table. Here's why: According to the polls Labour is holding on to barely 60% of those who voted for us in 2005. This toff rhetoric sends these lost voters running for the hills because it is the exact opposite of why they returned to Labour in the first place. They supported us because we were a healthy, outgoing, positive and optimistic Labour Party that wants to help those who want to do better. Labour is rightly the party for those struggling to get by; but we must also remain the party for those who want to get on.
I grew up on a housing estate and was raised close to the area I'm seeking to represent. I come from a working class family - my Mum stacked shelves in Boots for 25 years and my dad was a dustman. They wanted more for me than they had for themselves, encouraged me to do well at school and - 25 years later, I've got a great job and a standard of living they never had a chance of themselves. That's what's great about Britain. To see those chances shared out more widely and equitably is why I'm in politics. It's why the Labour Party exists and it stands in opposition to the instincts and outlook of the Conservatives. So as a progressive, yes, I want the richest 1% of British people shouldering 23% of tax revenue. But let's not call them names while they're doing it.
Labels: Conservatives, taxes and benefits
posted by Stuart King at
17:04
<< Home