Labour's insane economic policies are taking us back to the dark 1970s
We have been here before. The crisis that the country faces may be catastrophic but it is not unprecedented. Anyone old enough to remember life in 1970s Britain will recall an almost universal sense of utter hopelessness and resignation. Most people (but not all, as it turned out) seemed to be beyond any thought of constructive rebellion against apparently invincible forces.
Decline was not just an alarming possibility: it was inevitable and crushing in its finality. The everyday business of life was not simply encumbered by incompetence and infuriatingly poor services as it is now. It was made virtually impossible: the lights were going out on a regular basis along with facilities like heating and cooking, which relied on electricity; the train service on which commuters depended (no working from home back then) was repeatedly withdrawn sometimes without warning; and essential supplies were obstructed, which caused desperate shortages of goods. It was often observed, with characteristic British irony, that it was like living through the war – only this time the enemy wasn't foreign.
You know what happened next. The Thatcher Government broke the death grip of trade union power which had crippled the British economy, not just by new legislation that directly limited the unions' coercive practices but by dismantling the nationalised industries over which they had a monopolistic hold.
Along with union hegemony, the suffocating grip of Left-wing councils was also brought down. I recall this particularly vividly because my family's life in the London Borough of Haringey had been turned into a class war nightmare by a vindictive Labour council whose rising star Jeremy Corbyn obligingly closed down the schools in solidarity with the striking caretakers.
But the miraculous revolution did not happen overnight. The first attempt to beat the coal miners who were critical to this struggle failed because the deprivation that their prolonged strike caused was too great for the population to bear. It took the Government a year of stockpiling coal in a carefully planned strategy to survive another winter of strikes before the breakthrough came.
There was no instant revelation on the political front either. The presentation of what soon became known as Thatcherism, with its transformational view of how wealth was created and distributed ('growing the pie' as opposed to simply dividing up the existing one into more equal pieces), was a major philosophical undertaking.
This was no mere electoral strategy. It was a historic shift of paradigmatic social thinking: a systematic argument with the Marxist analysis that had dominated political discourse in its harder or softer forms for a century.
It took philosophical thinkers like Friedrich Hayek and Nobel Prize-winning economic theorists like Milton Friedman, translated into practical action by an inspirational political adviser like Sir Keith Joseph, to create solutions that no one could have foreseen a generation before.
Yes children, that was how it happened all those years ago that Britain emerged from what looked like an inevitable descent into domestic failure and global insignificance. But how can this be relevant now? After all, we have learnt the essential lessons about how to create economic growth and encourage the spread of it through society – haven't we?
We know that private enterprise must be allowed to flourish if actual wealth is to increase, and that the state can only spend real money that markets produce if it is not to bankrupt the nation with debt. And, what is more, if the state inhibits or depresses the ability of private entrepreneurialism to flourish, there will be no possibility of it improving living conditions for anyone.
Surely we know all this – don't we? The awareness of it must be embedded in the consciousness of every serious politician who aspires to power. (The unserious ones who are so ideologically purblind that they will not accept it are, I genuinely believe, unlikely ever to be more than a disruptive nuisance.)
Blairite Labour had to demonstrate that it had been converted to the new truth before it could hope to be re-elected. It staged a ceremonial renunciation of the old dogma with the removal of its commitment to state ownership of the means of production and declared itself enthusiastically committed to capitalist free markets – so long as they were accompanied by 'social fairness' (which was, unfortunately, redistribution by another name).
After all that, here we are. A new Old Labour Government is now restoring the suffocating employment rights which make the dynamism and flexibility of entrepreneurial business impossibly difficult. It promises enormous amounts of money that don't exist and cannot be produced, because of the restrictions it has put on private enterprise, to public services like the NHS designed on the old monopolistic model. It caves in, without a struggle, to the demands of every public sector union for all the world as if the 1980s had never happened.
What is at the heart of this? To understand such retrograde thinking, you must listen to the rhetoric in which it is expressed. The Prime Minister and his hapless Chancellor speak of 'working people' as a homogeneous class whose communities are as conformist and predictable in their attitudes and loyalties as they were 50 years or more ago. Their lives are seen as inextricably bound up (and limited by) a single local industry which must be renewed or replaced by another industry or by a technological revolution into which the population can be inducted.
There appears to be no understanding that what used to be a solid, passive working class which wanted nothing more than safe jobs for itself and its progeny was awakened by the 1980s to the possibility of social mobility. The working people to whom Labour is offering its expensive beneficence may now quite possibly be inclined to start up their own ventures and move on. Pouring government money into regional capital projects will mean taxing their new enterprises into the grave.
The revelation of the Blair years was that there were lots of working (class) people who did not welcome the traditional, patronising Labour message. They may still be a minority, these brave individualists, but they are the future and they will not be ignored.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
G7 leaders gather in Canada for summit overshadowed by Middle East crisis and Trump's tariffs
Leaders of some of the world's biggest economic powers will arrive in the Canadian Rockies on Sunday for a Group of Seven summit overshadowed by a widening war across the Middle East and U.S. President Donald Trump's unresolved trade war with allies and rivals alike. Israel's strikes on Iran and Tehran's retaliation, which appeared to catch many world leaders unawares, is the latest sign of a more volatile world as Trump seeks to withdraw the U.S. from its role as world policeman. Speaking on a flight to Canada to attend the summit, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he had discussed efforts to de-escalate the situation with Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as other world leaders. Britain is sending Royal Air Force jets and other military reinforcements to the Middle East. "We do have longstanding concerns about the nuclear program Iran has. We do recognize Israel's right to self-defense, but I'm absolutely clear that this needs to de-escalate. There is a huge risk of escalation for the region and more widely," Starmer said, adding he expected "intense discussions" would continue at the summit. As summit host, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has decided to abandon the annual practice of issuing a joint statement, or communique, at the end of the meeting. With other leaders wanting to talk to Trump in an effort to talk him out of imposing tariffs, the summit risks being a series of bilateral conversations rather than a show of unity. Trump is the summit wild card. Looming over the meeting are Trump's inflammatory threats to make Canada the 51st state and take over Greenland. French President Emmanuel Macron is making a highly symbolic stop in Greenland on his way to Canada, meeting the Arctic territory's leader and Denmark's prime minister aboard a Danish helicopter carrier. Macron, who is one of the very few leaders to have known Trump during his first term, was the first European leader to visit the White House after Trump took office, emerging unscathed from the Oval Office encounter. But despite the two leaders' sporadic bromance, Macron's approach to Trump has failed to bear major results, with France caught up in the president's planned tariffs on the European Union. Nor did it bring any U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine despite Macron's efforts, together with Starmer, to build a coalition of nations that could deploy forces after any ceasefire with Russia, with the hope it would convince the Trump administration to provide backup. Trump is scheduled to arrive late Sunday in Kananaskis, Alberta. Bilateral meetings between other leaders are possible Sunday, but the summit program does not get underway until Monday. Peter Boehm, Canada's sherpa of the 2018 G7 summit in Quebec and veteran of six G7 summits, expects the heads of state to pivot discussion to devote more time to the war. "Leaders can accommodate a discussion, perhaps even a statement," Boehm said. "The foreign policy agenda has become much larger with this." Leaders who are not part of the G7 but have been invited to the summit by Carney include the heads of state of India, Ukraine, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea, Australia, Mexico and the UAE. Avoiding tariffs will continue to be top of mind. "Leaders, and there are some new ones coming, will want to meet Donald Trump," Boehm said. "Trump doesn't like the big round table as much he likes the one-on-one." Bilateral meetings with the American president can be fraught as Trump has used them to try to intimidate the leaders of Ukraine and South Africa. Former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien told a panel this week that if Trump does act out, leaders should ignore him and remain calm like Carney did in his recent Oval Office meeting. "He tends to be a bully," Chrétien said. "If Trump has decided to make a show to be in the news, he will do something crazy. Let him do it and keep talking normally." Starmer had a warm Oval Office meeting with the president in February, wooing Trump with an invitation for a state visit from King Charles III. Trump has praised the British prime minister, despite their political differences. Last month Britain and the U.S. announced they had struck a trade deal that will slash American tariffs on U.K. autos, steel and aluminum. It has yet to take effect, however, though British officials say they are not concerned the Trump administration might go back on its word. Starmer's attempts to woo Trump have left him in an awkward position with Canada, the U.K.'s former colony, close ally and fellow Commonwealth member. Starmer has also drawn criticism — especially from Canadians — for failing to address Trump's stated desire to make Canada the 51st state. Asked if he has told Trump to stop the 51st state threats, Starmer told The Associated Press: "I'm not going to get into the precise conversations I've had, but let me be absolutely clear: Canada is an independent, sovereign country and a much-valued member of the Commonwealth." The war in Ukraine will be on the agenda. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is due to attend the summit and is expected to meet with Trump, a reunion coming just months after their bruising Oval Office encounter which laid bare the risks of having a meeting with the U.S. president. Starmer met with Carney in Ottawa before the summit for talks focused on security and trade, in the first visit to Canada by a British prime minister for eight years. German officials were keen to counter the suggestion that the summit would be a "six against one" event, noting that the G7 countries have plenty of differences of emphasis among themselves on various issues. "The only the problem you cannot forecast is what the president of the United States will do depending on the mood, the need to be in the news," said Chrétien. ____ Lawless contributed to this report from Ottawa, Ontario. AP reporters Josh Boak in Calgary, Alberta, Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo, Sylvie Corbet in Paris, Geir Moulson in Berlin and Nicole Winfield in Rome also contributed to this report.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
A huge political spat has broken out... over a playground
A plan to build a playground in Alkrington has been delayed once again. The suburb, on the edge of Middleton, had seen a number of playgrounds close down in recent years. The decision over where to build a new one has dragged on for years, with squabbles between politicians and locals over the most suitable spot. READ MORE: Blankety Blank viewers in shock after learning winning contestant died since filming show READ MORE: DWP confirms Winter Fuel Payment will only be £100 for some pensioners Last month, it appeared the matter was finally settled when rochdale-council>Rochdale council's township committee in Middleton approved funding of £84,840 for the new playground on a field off Mainway and Moss Lane. The money is expected to go towards paths, fencing, swings, see-saws and other play equipment. But now Labour councillors, who approved the funding, have been left furious after two Middleton Independent Party (MIP) politicians called in the decision. 'Calling in' a decision opens up the matter for further scrutiny if politicians feel there is an issue that hasn't properly been addressed. The call-in will mean further delays to a project that has already dragged since 2023. A statement issued by Middleton Labour read: 'The South Middleton councillors believe it is a disgrace that a legitimately arrived and very popular decision can be delayed without good cause by the MIP councillors' petty behaviour, especially when they do not have any seats in the South Middleton Ward. 'The decision taken to go ahead on May 22 was taken with 12 Labour councillors voting for, and two MIPs not even voting against - they abstained. 'Now they want to revoke the decision depriving kids of a long awaited play park in South Alkrington. We must add 1,200 Alkrington residents have signed a petition in favour of this new play park, backing our decision. 'The 'call-in' decision will take place at the end of July. However, South Middleton councillors had hoped to get spades in the ground this year to start building the play park. 'This will prevent planning and organisation until this 'call-in' decision is taken, which will inevitably delay the erection of the play park for many months.' Although other sites were considered by the local authority, Mainway field was the largest open space available, meaning potential noise and antisocial behaviour would be less of an issue. A council report went on to say they will look into mine shafts under the field as well as drainage issues before any building work. Lee Wolf, leader of the MIP, believes there was a lack of consultation before the process and has questioned the impartiality of the decision making. He said: "Our involvement in this matter began last year when I stood as the MIP candidate for Middleton South. From the outset, the site of the proposed play park in Alkrington emerged as a key issue for local residents. 'We have always supported the development of new recreational facilities across Middleton. These spaces are vital for families and young people, and we believe they should be delivered through a process that is fair, transparent, and inclusive of the community's voice. 'However, we have serious concerns about how the decision to site the play park at Mainway Field was reached. 'Our two MIP councillors could not support the report, as it failed to provide a clear and consistent rationale for selecting Mainway Field. 'Throughout this process, our aim has never been to obstruct progress. We want to work collaboratively with all stakeholders, including our Labour colleagues, to find a solution that genuinely reflects the needs and wishes of the community. There is still room for compromise, whether that means revisiting alternative sites or reconsidering the exact positioning within Mainway Field. 'We remain committed to ensuring that decisions about our shared spaces are made openly, fairly, and with the full involvement of the people who live here. Our community deserves nothing less.' Rochdale council confirmed the matter has been called in and will be discussed further at meeting next month.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘I'll use private sector to help clear NHS backlog', says Streeting
Wes Streeting has said he will consider leaning more heavily on the private sector as he bids to clear NHS waiting lists. The health secretary said he will not be 'bound by outdated ideological battles' when tackling the crisis in the service, where 7.39 million people are currently waiting to be seen by doctors. He said it would be 'foolish to turn away' from the private healthcare sector, but cautioned that 'we must see it for what it is'. Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Streeting said: 'Some ask if using private capacity contradicts NHS principles. Nonsense. What contradicts NHS principles is letting people suffer unnecessarily when capacity exists to treat them. 'The treatment remains free at the point of use – that's what matters. The independent healthcare sector won't affect this principle, and so it would be foolish to turn it away when we so desperately need it in certain specialities. But at the same time, we must see it for what it is.' The health secretary, who previously received treatment for kidney cancer, added: 'Cancer taught me that time is precious. When you're waiting for treatment, every day matters. That's why I won't waste a single day, or a single available appointment slot, in our mission to give patients the care they deserve.' His comments are likely to spark uproar from MPs on the left of the Labour Party, who fiercely opposed expanding the role of the private sector under Jeremy Corbyn. The former Labour leader has previously accused Sir Keir Starmer of 'betraying' the health service for relying more on private care. The government has said partnerships with the private sector under Labour so far have delivered more than 500,000 treatments, with waiting lists having fallen to a two-year low of 7.39 million in April. Darren Grewcock, a security guard, had hip replacement surgery at the Meriden Hospital through a full NHS referral after an injury left him unable to work. He said: 'The X-rays revealed that I had bone-on-bone osteoarthritis on my left hip. I was referred for surgery and given a list of places you can go – which included options in the independent sector. 'Within three days of booking, I had an appointment booked with the consultant. I couldn't believe how quickly he got back to me and the process started. My recovery has been a huge success. I am fitter, stronger, and more mobile than I was at 50." The charity, Patients Association, welcomed the greater role of the private sector in the NHS. Chief executive Rachel Power said: 'As the NHS continues to tackle the backlog, communication and choice must remain central to how care is delivered because patients don't just need treatment, they need to feel informed and empowered.'