Securonomics, the right way

Posted on September 2 2023

My friend, Green New Deal colleague and Finance for the Future partner, Colin Hines, has this letter in the Guardian this morning:

Rachel Reeves deludes herself if she thinks that ruling out a wealth tax will demonstrate Labour's economic competence to most voters, when clearly what most want is an increase in economic security.

Despite this, Labour, with its increasing emphasis on a Tory-lite programme of reducing the national debt and ditching its wealth tax promises, is rapidly moving away from the policies needed to provide such security. What is required is a massive increase in expenditure on social and green infrastructure, and on the wages and conditions of those working in these areas. This is the approach needed to meet voters' desire for a rapid reduction in financial insecurity, and a hope-inducing social and green new deal.

Rachel Reeves must rethink Labour's obsession with debt reduction and stop pandering to the rich, and instead explain how she is going to pay for the massive increase in public expenditure needed to provide what she has termed “securonomics” – a far more electorally astute goal.

Colin Hines

Convener, UK Green New Deal Group

Perhaps unsurprisingly, I agree.

Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:

You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.

And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:

8

8 Responses

  1. Werner White says:
    September 2 2023 at 8:59 am

    Spot on. On the same theme Kate Pickett had an article in The Guardian yesterday. The Spirit Level was written in 2009. It is even more relevant today.I haven’t read The Inner Level however the article has prompted me to buy a copy.

  2. Pilgrim Slight Return says:
    September 2 2023 at 10:19 am

    Agreed too – but I would be even more prosaic than that.

    If the Tories have taken so much money out of the general economy and public services, surely Reed and Stymied know that all you have to do is restore what has been taken out for a start?

    This is the bit I cannot understand about Labour at the moment.

    It locks in the blame they were criminally apportioned for the 2008 crash – it corroborates that Tory lie, and also the way Laboured did not contest it.

    Now they are still going to go along with it, it seems.

  3. Schofield says:
    September 2 2023 at 2:14 pm

    To be honest I’ve reached the stage of thinking what’s the point of the Labour Party after Attlee they seem to screw so much up like the Tories and like the latter with so much childish arrogance!

  4. Arwel Huw Morgan says:
    September 3 2023 at 9:28 am

    Good morning, Richard.
    This comment is not specific to today’s themes but concerns the validity of the “Labour Party” to consider itself in any way on the side of British workers, but truly merit the appellation, “Tory-lite”.
    Immediately after the debacle of ‘Truss-nomics’, a Tory grandee, (possibly? – I can’t remember who) was being interviewed about the virtual certainty of the Tories being trounced out of sight at the next General Election.
    His reaction stunned me,
    “Oh! Starmer as PM? That won’t be so bad!”
    And that confirmed, beyond any doubt, of Starmer’s credentials as “Tory-lite”.

    I don’t think it was a dream but I can’t recall any comment on your blog that testifies to its being a reality.

    How could anyone with any socialist sympathies consider voting for Starmer’s “Labour” after witnessing that Tory’s testimonial to Starmer’s political leanings.

    Thanks for your blog and your occasional forrays into nature.

    AHM

  5. Jenw says:
    September 4 2023 at 9:33 pm

    I see you are listed as a speaker on Stop Starmer on Saturday, Conway Hall, 12.00 to 15.00.
    Can’t be there but anyone else who lives near enough, it should be interesting. Bob Gill and Audrey White among others. Interesting line-up.