The most powerful narrative to emerge from the last General Election was the Tory line that the nation had ‘maxed out on its credit card’. This, along with the notion that the only remedy was for the country to tighten its collective belt, became the prism through which the political landscape was seen during the election, by the media and by the public at large, and it was undoubtedly a central reason for Labour’s heavy defeat. The Tory plans for drastic deficit reduction became seen as ‘credible’, whilst Labour was recast as the party of the ‘deficit deniers’ that had spent far beyond its means.
To some extent, this narrative continues to frame the political debate today. As Jonathan Freedland has recently pointed out in the Guardian, even after it became clear that the Government will have to borrow £158bn more than originally forecast due to the collapse in growth, George Osborne’s personal approval ratings have either held firm or increased, with the vast majority of voters agreeing that the solution to a debt crisis cannot be more debt. In one sense, it matters little how many Nobel-prize winning economists come out and back the Labour policy for a slower pace to deficit reduction coupled with investment to increase growth. As long as voters see cutting the deficit as simple common sense, Osborne will continue to enjoy economic credibility amongst voters.
The Tories have always had a better grasp of common sense economics – that is, economic policies that are not necessarily economically right, but make sense to voters – than Labour. Throughout the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher was seen as economically credible in part because of her pledge to manage the country’s finances like a housewife would manage the budget of a home. Like the present credit card narrative, the idea that the economy of a nation is in any way comparable to a domestic budget is clearly ludicrous, but it resonated with enough people to help secure Thatcher three election victories even as unemployment rose past the three million mark.
The longer the coalition is in office, the more it becomes clear that some inside it are using the experiences of the Tories in the 1980s as a blueprint for success in 2015 and beyond. The hope is that as in the 1980s, enough people will feel they have been doing well enough to reward the Tories – with or without Lib Dem support – with five more years in office, at least to be able to ‘finish the job’ of deficit reduction. The continued evocation of the ‘credit card’ narrative allows the coalition to operate the doublethink that simultaneously blames Labour, and not the global banking crisis, for the deficit it inherited, and blame Europe, and not the coalition, for the continuing economic problems.
The question for Labour, then, is how best to respond to this common sense economics. The party is in the unenviable position of being right without being seen to be right. One option being advocated by some is to accept the coalition’s common sense narrative, and compete on their terms for economic credibility in the nation’s eyes. Yet this would be a difficult battle to win, given that the Tories have been perfecting this line of attack for some years now. And it would also fail to change the economic reality that is affecting the lives of thousands of ordinary people across the country. Perhaps it is time for the left to come up with its own brand of common sense economics. Without it, no matter how right Ed Balls and others are proven, the party might not even get a hearing.
No comments:
Post a Comment