BBC Fact check: Are Lib Dems left of Labour?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

I thought this topic deserved it's own thread, but it does follow on from this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=191x3289

--------------------

Fact check: Are Lib Dems left of Labour?

Left-wing Labour MP Brian Sedgemore has defected to the Liberal Democrats, saying he was "disgusted" by the party he joined in 1968 and its "careless destruction of liberties". So are the Liberal Democrats now to the left of Labour?

(snip)

The Oxford concise dictionary defines "left" as "people supporting a more extreme form of socialism than others in their group." The traditional aim of socialism has been the public ownership of the key factors of production, the redistribution of income from rich to poor, and the provision of key services like health and education publicly rather than privately.

Under Tony Blair, the Labour Party has explicitly abandoned public ownership by repealing Clause 4 and no longer speaks explicitly of redistribition - and although it still believes in state-funded public services, it is prepared to rely partly on competition and the private sector to supply those services. Charles Kennedy, who agrees with all these policies, says it is not the Liberal Democrats, but Labour who have changed.

(snip)

The Liberal Democrat version of redistribution broadly focuses on moving money from the very rich to the middle class, while Labour's approach has been to redistribute tax revenue from the top 20% to the bottom 20%. The actual answer depends on whether you believe left wing should be measured mainly in economic terms. Is supporting or opposing the Iraq war left or right? And is campaigning against identity cards and other measures on civil liberty grounds left or right? The question of whether the Lib Dems are now to the left of Labour is in the eye of the beholder.

More here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/issues/4485029.stm

[ben_packard]

1. Good article, it's definitely not straight forward

Economically LibDems seem to be to the right of Labour and have traditionally been so, both regarding state ownership and redistribution (and where the money goes). Tuition fee removal helps the middle class (the poorest are already exempt from up front fees), as does stamp duty increase (how many minimum wage earners can even dream of home ownership) But perhaps socially they are more liberal (which is inaccurately used as synonomous to 'left' on DU where the two are generally side by side in the same party), for example on civil liberties, crime and punishment, position on the war etc.

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. Economically, the Lib Dem local income tax benefits the poorer

since the overall conclusion has been that, typically, those with household income above about £40,000 (about 25% of households - or is that 25% of people?) would be worse off - and I think the implication is that the lower your income, the more you'll benefit from it. So it's not a simple picture economically either.

[ben_packard]

5. Not necessarily

you have to look at not only where the money's coming from but also where it's going. The tax increase would be used to fund tuition fees and stop the elderly having to sell there homes (those that have them) for personal care. There are different ways of using that money more effectively for the REAL poor.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. That's the revenue from the 50% national income tax rate

The local income tax won't raise any extra revenue - it actually requires a bit of the revenue from the national tax rate to implement it. What I'm saying it that parts of the Lib Dem tax plans are genuinely redistributive - which is why it's not a clear choice of which party if futher left.

[non sociopath skin]

7. The NS had an interesting editorial a couple of weeks ago ...

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be on their website right now but here's the part about Council v. Local Income Tax:

“….the Lib Dems would abolish council tax and replace it with a local income tax. This sounds redistributive because, as the party rightly points out, poor householders pay a higher proportion of their incomes in council tax than the better-off ones. Yet it is not redistributive at all. Council tax needs reform, not abolition. It is the only significant British tax on property, and inequality in asset wealth is far greater (and far more unfair) than inequality of income. The rich easily dodge income taxes, because they can move their money offshore and hide it in various other ways. That is why the working poor always end up paying such a high proportion of income tax revenues. Property, however, can't be moved or hidden. A tax on it may be tough on that familiar figure of self-pitying Conservatism, the widow living alone in a large family house, and perhaps allowances can be made for her. But is it too hard-hearted to point out that she could sell the house, make a big, untaxed capital gain and move to a granny flat?”

http://www.newstatesman.com/thisweekcontent.htm

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. The inequality in asset wealth may be more than income

but the council tax levied on it is regressive. In contrast, the national income tax is highly progressive.

Decile groups of all households ranked by equivalised disposable income
						Bottom	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	Top	All households
Equivalised disposable income			6 516	10 112	12 166	14 300	16 758	19 464	22 618	27 014	33 413	56 635	21 899
Council tax and Northern Ireland rates	 	 669	 694	 681	 720	 740	 764	 829	 875	 921	1 013	 791
  less: Council tax benefit/Rates rebates	 242	 234	 202	 146	 90	 65	 33	 8	 4	 4	 103
net % of disposable income paid as council tax	6.55%	4.55%	3.94%	4.01%	3.88%	3.59%	3.52%	3.21%	2.74%	1.78%	3.14%
% of disposable income paid as income tax	3.01%	4.79%	5.40%	9.07%	12.08%	14.56%	17.97%	20.21%	22.23%	26.72%	18.07%

source (last 2 lines calculated from those figures by me)

The problem is that Labour has stuck with the Tory way of calculating the Council tax - in which the amount paid goes up slower than the value of the house.

[kenny blankenship]

2. The Lib-Dems' leaders like Kennedy

Originally formed a Social-Democrat Party of the UK. Social-Democracy is the original party of socialism, begun in Germany with the advice of Engels and Marx. (and also the famous criticism of Marx, see the Critique of the Gotha Program). The SPD in Britain didn't get traction, so they formed the Liberal Democrats.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. When the SDP was formed in Britain, it was from the right wing of Labour

and no-one disputed that then. Blair came into politics shortly after that - and when he got high up in the party, started dragging it to the right. http://www.politicalcompass.org/ has plotted what it thinks the movements of Labour have been since the 70s - and that the Liberal/Lib Dems haven't moved much.

No-one ever thought there was much Marxism in the British SDP.

[T_i_B]

9. If anything...

...the SDP was formed as a protest against the Marxism of the Labour party of Michael Foot and Tony Benn.