It’s about the fundamentals, silly

The basic reason that the leadership election has been so disappointing, until Jeremy Corbyn came on the scene, was that it was stuck on issues (insofar as it was stuck on any issues at all) that, while certainly important, did not have the makings of a vision.   Even when Corbyn prompted the others to produce some actual policies, they were not the real thing.   Andy Burnham was right to praise land value tax and above all the need to integrate social care within the NHS, and Yvette Cooper was absolutely right to demand that Britain takes its proper share of Syrian refugees where the government response has been callously dehumanised.   Bully for her.   But these are not the fundamentals, and only Jeremy Corbyn seems to have grasped what this election is really all about.

it is about how the world (because it concerns far, far more than just Britain) should respond to the most momentous event since 1945.   That is the biggest financial/economic crash for nearly a century, the slowest recovery since the Great Depression, and the longest run of prolonged austerity (and far from over) since the 1870s.     The City, the corporate business elite and the Tories (and to a lesser degree the Blairites from Blair downwards) regarded this as a glitch from which business-as-usual should return as soon as possible.   They believed the underlying structure was sound, the ideology was right (i.e. de-regulation of finance, unfettered capitalism, glorification of the market, privatisation of all industries and services wherever possible, and suppression of any counter-force and in particular the trade unions), and removal of governments from the action was the best way to promote efficiency and growth.   But not only did they believe it then, they still believe it when the evidence against it is now overwhelming.

The ultra-liberal business model has manifestly failed.   It has led to an intensely fragile global economy, indeed to secular stagnation as Lawrence Summers has rightly termed it, and over six years of grinding austerity have produced neither sustainable growth nor much deficit reduction.  We need some new ideas about the fundamentals, and only Corbyn seems to be offering them.   He opposes further austerity on the grounds that continually contracting the economy is incompatible with lasting growth.   He wants to rebalance the economy by large-scale public investment in industry and services, with the serious goal of full employment, paid for either by mandating the publicly-owned banks to prioritise investment in British manufacturing or by a direct injection of QE funding into industrial investment rather than via the banks or by requiring a fair contribution of the costs from the extremely rich, none of which would require any increase in public borrowing.   Instead of pursuing privatisation and outsourcing which has turned out wildly expensive and wasteful, he would seek to create a new settlement between State and markets where private markets have clearly failed, particularly in sectors like energy, housing, rail, water, pensions and banking, in a manner that optimised the public interest rather than just maximised money-making.   And much more.

10 thoughts on “It’s about the fundamentals, silly

  1. I tweeted you as a hero of the 48 who voted against the Welfare Bill. I really feel JC cannot make it to 2020 and win. Andy has more of a chance. I have been told JC will stand down for the right person.

    Best wishes Michael.

    Kind Regards,


  2. Oh, I do hope that Jeremy Corbyn will be able to realise his ideas and visions for a better society.

    Cooper and Burnham still seem to think that austerity is the way to go. They are far better educated than I am, but (thanks to you, Mr Meacher) even I know that’s wrong! Corbyn really does seem to be our only hope!

    Osborne has announced even more cuts, and we apparently now have Civil Servants on zero hours contracts! He’s destroying the economy and the country as well.

    I am rather worried at all the posts on Facebook from people who are long standing ,loyal members of the Labour Party but who have been banned from voting. Some who have appealed this decision have been told it’s all “a mistake” – but how many haven’t appealed? Don’t know they can, don’t know how to or perhaps are away on holiday after having sent in their votes. They are informed after they’ve voted, and all the ones I’ve heard of have voted for Jeremy. There will be riots should he lose on a tight vote.

  3. Hum about right the peasants have awaken and want a real labour supporter back in control but andy pandy evette and other blair babies havent the morals of any decent person only greedie people yet they still twist it around how niice they vould be neigh they are worst kind of mp their days are numbered has they shown even now they strive to derail a proper labour man rid the party has they will do more damge with their greed

  4. I’ve just heard that the bedridden wife of a Facebook friend of mine who doesn’t do social media has been banned from voting. She had joined as a £3 Supporter. He’s also been banned. His CLP is controlled by Blairites so no help from there.

    A shameful and undemocratic state of affairs.

    Jeremy needs to get through on the first ballot as he mightn’t get enough 2nd preference votes.

  5. “She served in the Cabinet between 2008 and 2010 under Prime Minister Gordon Brown as Chief Secretary to the Treasury and then as”

    Yvette Cooper served in the cabinet as Chief Secretary to the treasury whilst Gordon Brown used Quantitative Easing to bail out the Banks. Yet challenges Jeremy for wanting to put PQE into vital public expenditure.

    It is really no wonder that she persists with the Neo-Liberal agenda, but you would have thought that she would be far more open to modern thinking given her knowledge of how the crash took place and her husband being one of the architects of the disaster along with the previous Tories.

    When people like Yvette say that PQE is inflationary, how does she equate that with the private banks that print money willy nilly into the economy every day of the week, without the care and attention of Jeremy’s controlled PQE for public purpose?

  6. Respect to Mr meacher for writing what he has in the above article, but nobody has mentioned the “Royal Prerogative”, or Mr Corbyns stated aims to end this maladministration. A state of affairs bordering the treasonous to my view. 1911, is a year steeped in infamy. Action here would end the semi presidential power currently available to be excercised or abused by a British PM, according to his moral stature. Mr Corbyn has this right, as he has so much right. I do hope this man is the real deal and not the mirror of the US’s messianic 2008 “election”. I put the ‘election’ word in apostrophes for the reason that I believe most elections are hopelessly flawed or outright rigged.

    Too, one must always remember Mr Wisners’ operation “Mockingbird”, still going strong today. We are all Mushrooms.

    Most of what Mr Corbyn has to say is bang on including the ISIS charade. Though on some matters my views diverge, that is healthy. Though, I would like this staement expanded upon at some length:-

    ” Instead of pursuing privatisation and outsourcing which has turned out wildly expensive and wasteful, he would seek to create a new settlement between State and markets where private markets have clearly failed, particularly in sectors like energy, housing, rail, water, pensions and banking, in a manner that optimised the public interest rather than just maximised money-making. ” MM.

    Mmmm. “create a new settlement” … ? Now there is an oxymoron, where this might apply to Markets. Markets do not exist except insofar as they are rigged by Banksters. So, what settlement is being proposed here?

    The Government is supposed to administer the affairs of the indigenous people not transnational markets and corporations. Governments have lost the trust of a great many people through wilful corruption of many kinds involving every area of every day life. From criminally unlawful taxation, through intrusive surveillance and belligerent policing via corporate coppers, criminal banking practices made possible by Government abandonment of its fiduciary responsibilities. Why do “Markets” need a settlement. Markets are arenas within which producers offer goods and services in competition, whereby the best goods and services will win. So I think this requires further discussion. Too I believe 100% that VAT ought to be banned immediately. What I wonder are Mr Corbyns views on this disgraceful levy? Ok, I’ll stop there as the poor bloke still has way to go.

  7. I am beginning to lose all faith in politics the system is again being rigged and it’s blatantly obvious to all.

    I received an email asking if I have voted and the voting is now closed, what was the point of my vote and waste of £3.00.

    The system is flawed and one wonders why, welcome to wonderful Britain.

    Labour has destroyed itself beyond recognition and DC will have a smirk over his pork like appearance.

  8. An elderly lady who lives in Royston was going to sign up as a £3 supporter but then decided to join the LP. Her membership has been delayed as they “need to do identity checks” which will take around 6 weeks, so she has missed the deadline to register as a supporter and won’t be able to vote.

    My Sheffield friends were refused a vote as they signed to sponsor a friend of theirs in TUSC. Is this really a good enough reason?

  9. Oops. The lady lives in Royton / Oldham. I wonder if Mr Meacher could help. She’s very upset, apparently.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *