Cut price politics is a threat to our democracy

Avatar

By Darrell Goodliffe

It probably isn’t that fashionable on the left to defend our ‘political class’ against the roasting it gets both in the media and mainstream public opinion. However, before we deliver a knee-jerk response condemning them all for having their ‘snouts in the trough’ we should pause, take a deep breath, and reflect firstly on where the attacks are coming from. It is not unfair to say that it is the right-wing media leading the charge from the ‘valiant’ Daily Telegraph ‘defending the taxpayer’ right through to the Daily Mail, Express etc. It is clearly this section of the media in the vanguard of the ‘moral outrage’ against our parliamentarians.

Compare and contrast the two views of the controversy surrounding the new Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) from the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph and you will see what I mean. Once we have got past the who then the next question becomes the why and the wherefores. In the case of the initial expose the answer is obvious; to sell newspapers. However, why is this section of the media continuing to bang the drum? We have all heard the grand promises of a ‘cut price politics’ specifically designed to appease the anger of the mob; however, we really have to ask what the true intent and effect of ‘cutting the cost of politics’ actually is.

In the case of the newly established IPSA, it’s own spokeswomen told the BBC:

“The estimated cost of setting up IPSA in 2009/10 is £6.6m.”

This high figure was blamed initially on ‘set-up’ costs but it now transpires that the annual budget is to be £6.5 million. Tellingly, the right-wing Taxpayers’ Alliance is also keen on ‘cut price politics’ but even this figure is a little too ‘profligate’ for its tastes. Let’s be quite clear; the IPSA regime is nothing short of a joke and it’s not just MPs who are set to suffer but also their staff. This is what Unite’s Parliamentary Branch have to say:

“The changes IPSA are proposing have very serious consequences for MPs. MPs employ their staff on particular terms and contracts. MPs will have a choice to either pay out of their own pocket, sack people or reduce wages. They could face employment tribunals. It wasn’t staff who created the expenses scandal but they are suffering for it.”

As I understand it, IPSA will no longer provide for maternity or long-term sick pay through the expenses system, so effectively forcing MPs to either provide from their own pockets or fire these staff. IPSA also notably backed down from proposals to pay interns the minimum wage. There is a clear parallel to be drawn between the IPSA regime and that which Willie Walsh is running at British Airways – and no Labourite worth the name would consider supporting that. So, IPSA is Labour’s creation and it is something Labour should now take a lead in helping to reform.

Aside from the immediate issue, there are far more sinister undertones to ‘cut price politics’; namely the potential marginalisation and exclusion from politics of the less well-off. Of course, this has arguably long been the case but a wholesale attack on expenses and a salary which is really rather poor compared to some in the private sector (even the head of IPSA himself is reportedly taking home a healthy £100,000+ annual pay cheque) will only make the existing problem worse.

Currently 23 members of the cabinet are millionaires and I for one can’t imagine the likes of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, the Daily Telegraph, et al, being that unhappy with this situation. In fact, they probably realise that the more the ‘cut price politics’ agenda succeeds, the more politics will exclude those lower down the income scale’ and only become a viable vocation for the rich. This is the core of why it as an agenda is poisonous to our democracy; even more so than the questionable expense claims themselves.

If Labour is serious about cleaning up politics then it needs to begin by telling the electorate a few uncomfortable home truths that our representatives have shied away from. Democracy will cost the taxpayer money; this is a sacrifice people have to be prepared to make if that is what they want and serious reforms are likely to cost more (pure PR, for example, almost certainly would; this is why expenses for the European Parliament are so high). How best to regulate the system and make sure it is both cost effective and accessible is open to debate. But one thing that is for sure: bodies like IPSA are not the answer and neither is the cut price politics on offer from the likes of the Daily Telegraph and David Cameron.

More from LabourList

DONATE HERE

We provide our content free, but providing daily Labour news, comment and analysis costs money. Small monthly donations from readers like you keep us going. To those already donating: thank you.

If you can afford it, can you join our supporters giving £10 a month?

And if you’re not already reading the best daily round-up of Labour news, analysis and comment…

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY EMAIL