Corbyn the campaigner
"Corbyn? Absolutely not," said a Weaver Vale vox popper on ITV. "He's another Trump." The other people interviewed were very keen on policies from the new Labour manifesto, and pretty positive about Jeremy Corbyn. I assume the "Trump" bit was edited in for dramatic value.
"Well intentioned but probably unelectable," said a vox popper on BBC Newsnight. Others supported Corbyn, one saying he didn't agree with everything, but when you hear him unfiltered (which never gets covered) he convinces people.
Paul Rogers, professor of politics at Bradford university, where the Labour manifesto was launched on Tuesday morning, told the BBC afterwards "When Corbyn's on the street you see something very different from the general image that's been constructed." (That might not be accurate to the last syllable, but it gets his point.)
"For the many not the few" - the manifesto
The manifesto PDF is 128 pages long, the last numbered page is 124, there are 33 pages which are blank, full page images or the list of contents, but that still leaves 95 pages to read. Oh, and the costings balance sheet boasts another 5 pages (with 38 footnotes). There's no time to write about all of it, so I'll have a go at a section from the beginning and one right at the end.Media coverage of a manifesto from the "non-credible" party (thanks to five years of work under Ed Miliband and highlighted rather than combatted by the name of John McDonnell's Fiscal Credibility Rule) tended to concentrate on "left-wing" proposals like renationalisation, the (correct) assumption that borrowing to obtain an asset need not be a problem on the national accounts, and that Labour thought that meant it didn't need to be mentioned in their costings document.
Then Corbyn threw them another titbit by disagreeing with the document in his hand on whether Labour intends to lift the pay freeze. Apparently they do, don't and will alleviate its worst effects. The ambition of the manifesto on large economic and industrial subjects contrasts sharply with more tentative proposals on benefits and major social provision.
Oh, and I found a couple of typos.
"Negotiating Brexit"
"Labour accepts the referendum result and a Labour government will put the national interest first. We will prioritise jobs and living standards, build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations."Simples! Though it might cause concern to anybody who remembers the motion which was passed unanimously at last year's Labour conference.
"[Conference] recognises that many of those who voted to leave the EU were expressing dissatisfaction with EU or national policy and were voting for change, but believes that unless the final settlement proves to be acceptable then the option of retaining EU membership should be retained. The final settlement should therefore be subject to approval, through parliament and potentially through a general election, or a referendum."
The manifesto pledges Labour to "scrap the Conservatives' Brexit White Paper" and work to retain "the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union", putting jobs and the economy first. "Retaining benefits" doesn't obviously sound different from the Tories' vacuous "exact same benefits", though it's better English.
Labour would "immediately guarantee existing rights" for EU expats in Britain and "secure reciprocal rights" for British expats over there. But what rights? Rights to bring in family wherever and whenever born? And which expats? Those here on 23 June 2016? Or 8 June 2017? Or 29 March 2019? How will they know who they are? Would Labour keep the 85-page residency application? Has even Keir Starmer read the negotiating guidelines?
The EU considers these rights to include: the right to reside and work in another Member State, the right to social security and health care systems, the right to recognition of diplomas, certificates and other qualifications, for the lifetime of the person concerned, meaning:
"for instance, that an EU citizen residing in the UK who marries a third country national after the withdrawal of the UK maintains the current right to family reunification. It means that a UK citizen who returns to the UK after a career in various EU countries can aggregate easily all pension rights. Or that an EU citizen who has worked in the UK for ten years and loses his job after the withdrawal of the UK can use the unemployment benefit period to find another job in another EU Member State."
At least Labour recognises that "'no deal' is the worst possible deal" and that transitional arrangements would be required but, like the Tories, they talk as if everything can be done in one package, when the Article 50 process is not a trade negotiation.
There's a lot of naive optimism here. Labour would "work constructively" on climate change, refugee crises and counter-terrorism, "build a close, co-operative future relationship", ensure continuing membership of the Horizon 2020 research programme, seek "memberhip (or equivalent relationships with) Euratom, the European Medicines Agency (soon to move out of London) and any other European organisation which offers benefits to the UK.
"Ensuring" is the dominant word here, though there's also "securing continued EU market access". Things to be ensured include the highest standards in food quality and animal welfare, "no rolling back of key rights and protections", national security and criminal justice arrangements, EU structural funding until 2020 (actually from the UK budget, and much the same as the Tory proposal), no return to a hard border in Ireland, Gibraltar's prosperity... You get the picture.
Labour proposes to drop the Great Repeal Bill (more accurately known as the #GreatCopyAndPasteBill), but it's not obvious that an EU Rights and Protections Bill would be an adequate replacement. Another bit of ensuring comes here, that "all EU-derived laws that are of benefit - including workplace laws, consumer rights and environmental protections – are fully protected without qualifications, limitations or sunset clauses".
The emphasis on workplace protection and environmental safeguards is odd, because those would surely be a matter of UK law. The only way in which they would come into negotiations with the EU27 would be if a UK government proposed something so lax that it would threaten a trade agreement.
A Labour government would "seek to retain membership" of Eurojust and Europol and access to the European Arrest Warrant process. And, presumably, undertake to maintain conformity to EU data protection regimes which would make that possible?
The manifesto is (fairly) explicit on devolution, intending to "put powers ['returned from Brussels'] as close to communities as possible", welcoming parliamentary scrutiny and challenge, and guaranteeing "a truly meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal" (even if there would be two or more deals). Overall it's as naively optimistic as the Tories' Article 50 white paper.
"Immigration"
"Labour offers fair rules and reasonable management of migration. In trade negotiations our priorities favour growth, jobs and prosperity. We make no apologies for putting these aims before bogus immigration targets."(As I write this I turn the radio on, to hear Farming Today, and farmers proclaiming that they will be voting on "Brexit-related issues". What choice will they actually be offered?)
Freedom of movement will end, the manifesto says, "but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures". The approach is very open to incomers (from all countries) and the needs of British business and service organisations, but hard on exploitative undercutting and unscrupulous employers - "We will stop overseas-only recruitment practices, strengthen safety-at-work inspections and increase prosecutions of employers evading the minimum wage".
Labour would reinstate the Migrant Impact Fund (which Cameron dropped and May has considered bringing back) for communities which experience sudden major inflows of people from outside. There are also lots of liberal proposals on ending migrant detention, welcoming refugees, taking international students out of the immigration figures (but also "cracking down on fake colleges" - you wonder how many have managed to survive the last decade's onslaught).
"International trade"
"Labour is pro-trade and pro-investment. The UK’s future prosperity depends on minimising tariff and non-tariff barriers that prevent us from exporting and creating the jobs and economic growth we need."And, of course, maximising motherhood and apple pie.
The manifesto proposes "an integrated trade and industrial strategy that boosts exports, investment and decent jobs in Britain" and proclaims Labour's commitment to "the rules-based international trading system of the World Trade Organisation" (of which we are currently a member via the EU, with our own membership ready to be revitalised, and with tariff and quota schedules then to be negotiated).
Human rights and social justice would be built into trade policy and no UK export support money would be available to "companies engaged in bribery or corrupt practices". Labour would work with other WTO members to "end the dumping of state-subsidised goods on our markets", unlike the Tories, who "consistently blocked EU efforts to respond to such dumping with the duties needed to defend the British steel industry".
SMEs would be promoted and a network of regional trade champions created. Labour would "actively support international negotiations towards an Environmental Goods Agreement at the WTO" and maintain the UK's leading position in production of motherhood and apple pie (Sorry).
There's a sting in the tail, however, in Labour's opposition to investor-state dispute systems which could allow corporations to sue governments for actions they see as restricting their profits. "We will open a dialogue with trading partners [of whom we currently have none, except in or via the EU] on alternative options that provide investor protection whilst guaranteeing equality before the law."
"A global Britain"
Diplomacy
"Labour recognises that, in leaving the EU, Britain will face both challenges and opportunities. We are deeply ambitious for our country’s future and will draw on our international networks to make Britain a champion of multilateral engagement. We will invest in the UK’s diplomatic services, rebuilding some of the key capabilities lost as a result of Tory cuts."
"Tory cuts" might include those for deficit reduction and the reallocation of functions and money in the creation of the Department for International Trade. Neither DIT nor the Foreign and Commonwealth Office gets a name check as such but the approach looks like a usually-comfortable mix of old-time FCO style and authority, Robin Cook ethics and just a touch of the hippy idealist.
The UN gets a lot of mentions, as does human rights, including the "rights, interests and self-determination of Britain’s overseas territories and their citizens, whether protecting the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands against anyone who would seek to challenge it, or supporting the right of the Chagos islanders to return to their homelands". And the UN must be reformed, working with partners "in the light of repeated abuses of the veto power". Good luck with that, and I mean it, as well as being cynical.
Peacebuilding, climate change, a two stage solution for Palestine/Israel, responsible defence sales are all headings the Tories would put their names under, though the style would be different. Demanding an independent, UN-led investigation into Yemen takes us further than Boris Johnson or the sainted Tobias Ellwood will currently go, but it's on the horizon even for them. A Minister for Peace and Disarmament is distinctively Labour though.
Defence
The first thing would be a strategic defence and security review, and you might expect an SDSR under Corbyn to be a very different beast, but a lot of this is very old-style Labour. You might almost suspect that Kevan Jones (Labour, North Durham, majority 13,644) had had a hand in it.There's an early mention of cyber warfare - topical at the moment - so I was tempted to go all the way back to the 2015 Conservative manifesto. The string "cyber" occurs three times: "We will invest to boost tourism in the South West and ensure the world-class defence assets and cyber-security industries of the South West benefit the local economy... cyber-crime... We will continue to invest in our cyber defence capabilities". How times change.
"The last Labour government consistently spent above the NATO benchmark of 2 per cent of GDP. Conservative spending cuts have put Britain’s security at risk, shrinking the army to its smallest size since the Napoleonic wars." It could be argued that there were deficit-related reasons for that, and for the changes to the forces which Liam Fox (Conservative, North Somerset, majority 23,099) started and Michael Fallon (Conservative, Sevenoaks, majority 19,561) is still recovering from, but a lot of the Tory back benches would agree with some of Labour's criticism.
It's essential to maintain cooperation with our EU partners within and outside NATO, Trident will be renewed (but we have a "responsibility to fulfil our obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty"), and there will be a Defence Industrial Strategy white paper "to secure a long-term future for the industry, workers and UK defence".
One thing I remember as an issue before the 1997 election was the standard of housing for (mostly army) personnel. A brief involvement in a tendering process to resolve part of this problem showed me the complexity of the work to be done (and of the PFI process). Labour undertakes to "drive up standards", "promote greater awareness of the Armed Forces Covenant" and "roll out a Homes Fit for Heroes programme that will insulate the homes of disabled veterans for free".
Development
There's an undertaking to limit the autonomy of private contractors to DFID. This is an interest of Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth, majority 7,453) with particular emphasis on DFID's sometimes peculiar "private finance arm" CDC Group.Support for the UN Sustainable Development Goals (established in 2015 as a successor to the Millennium development process Tony Blair was involved in) is another theme. Labour would guarantee least developed countries continued access to the UK market after Brexit (as they have now within the EU).
Ask Cameron and Osborne how much of this they would back, and stand back waiting for the "Yes, but...".
"The current global tax system is deeply unjust. Africa’s economies alone lose more than £46 billion annually through corruption and tax evasion – more than 10 times what they receive in aid. Labour will act decisively on tax havens, introducing strict standards of transparency for crown dependencies and overseas territories, including a public register of owners, directors, major shareholders and beneficial owners for all companies and trusts."
That might bring us closer to EU initiatives than the Tories will currently allow us to get.
Peter Ungphakorn (@CoppetainPU on Twitter) is reviewing the manifestos with regard to international trade, which might be of interest.
Labour manifesto, Brexit & agriculture. Rejects "no deal" with EU. Not cheap food policy. Nothing on farm subsidieshttps://t.co/UgYCQwLXfi pic.twitter.com/gsowZtALG7— Peter Ungphakorn (@CoppetainPU) May 16, 2017
