Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Sunday, 7 June 2015

Liz Kendall talks the talk - but can she walk the walk?

Labour leadership candidate Liz Kendall fires off both barrels with an uncharacteristically blunt and honest pitch that is unashamedly Localist; so much so that although there are points I would add, I would disagree with few words she writes -
Labour must move on from the past, too. Old Labour favoured top-down control from Whitehall. New Labour used managerialism and performance indicators to run things from the centre.....Devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is accelerating. We must support England’s right to its own voice too.
Of course she doesn't mention the key to devolved administration, taxes. In Switzerland central government only levies a third of tax - the balance is levied directly by cantons and municipalities. Unless we also devolve taxation in the UK we won't be rid of Labour's overweening central State. 

However, I simply can't see Labour's NEC agreeing a manifesto that devolves taxation let alone devolves power from Whitehall and Westminster. Like Osborne's devolution of the tough, unpopular rationing decisions whilst retaining control of the tax levers, they will no doubt come up with some sort of meaningless fudge. 

Still, the light is at least starting to dawn amongst our metropolitan elite.  


Anonymous said...

I suppose the question that would determine whether she is a true localist, would be her attitude to the EU....

If she is like most Swiss politicians and come to that the vast majority of her shitbag colleagues at Wasteminster, she will be all up for the EU, globalisation and Agenda 21.

Anonymous said...

...Er, just to add.

For people like her, it is all about creating a "sustainable" career.

john cheshire said...

There are two things that should never be given to socialists, and they are power and money. I'd also add that although all politicians lie, socialists do it with such gay abandon it almost seems to be genetic. That and their tendency to violence when they're not getting their own way.

Anonymous said...

I think Liz Kendall could exist equally well in the Conservative party.

I'm not sure what that say about her or them.

Anonymous said...

"I think Liz Kendall could exist equally well in the Conservative party."

The party system in Cessminster is a charade - pulling the wool over the UK public, as it is so designed.

Ton' Bliar in the Cons, whilst Dave would be to the left of the Labour party...... all of it political cross-dressing. Clearly - there are no independent and separate UK political parties - if one discounts the Communist party north of the border.
Cessminster, is merely what it was always meant to be, an echo chamber, where diktat direct from Brussels is rubber stamped.
I don't know whether you've noticed but it matters little or not at all these days - who gets in. Lav or Con, the green agenda, open doors and mass immigration, cutting the armed forces, writing benefits cheques and providing welfare for the world knocking at our door, kissing the arse of Obama, kowtowing to Islam and Multiculturalism goes on and is the unchallenged order.

Meanwhile down in the Satanic mills, the real political muscle is in the hands of the councils, where the social engineers deliberate over a demographic transition which is breath taking in it's scale and ambition but carries on regardless of what Theresa and Dave pretend to want it to be.

Plus it goes on almost - unnoticed by the great and the unwashed. This is by design, the Brussels machine saw it, how at local level the real change can be delivered and before we signed up to the Federal Superstate - the new boundary changes were being re-odered for the entry into the common market in 1972/73.

I am so sick and tired of local government been run by a clan of 'untouchables' these Taliban chiefs who are more prone to secrecy, security obsessed than was the NKVD lolling in the Lubyanka.

Yet and YES, I do want the power localism bestows, but back in the hands of local people. Local government, as the EU so planned, is way too powerful - I wish to see them all cut down to size, power should not be disbursed by some unelected social services panjandrum nor, should power be in the hands of the Metropolitan CEO and finance department.

Thus, the only way the levers and controls of local power can be placed back in the hands of the electorate, that means a chop on local budgetary powers - all of us should be able to vote on the proposed expenditure of our local government administration - annually - all public accounts to be set online and wages and salaries of local public sector apparatchiks and Nomenklatura to be public knowledge.

Kendal hasn't the brains to do what is really necessary, come to think of it - dispensing responsibilities to the proles - strikes fear into the pudgy faces of the UK political and corporate elite, it's gonna need a revolution.

Budgie said...

Anon 12:50, well said all of it. To add to your comment that Dave is to the left of Labour: there were unseemly display of triumphalism after the election, the crowers then producing a wish-list that Dave would be certain to carry out. If course he will do no such thing, and many a Tory voter will be left sorely disappointed.

Anonymous said...

I think it's rather quaint that some folk still believe politicians are public servants. Some folk think Cameron will campaign to leave the EU if he can't get his renegotiation package - the contents of which he's keeping secret. Some folk think there are fairies in the woods. There are, sometimes.


Cascadian said...

She is a glimmer of light in a pit of despair, like Raedwald I cannot believe this will be acceptable to the NEC and their paymaster (unions).

After the euphoria of the gutless deserting UKIP to vote for more camoron I see the recriminations are surfacing-5 more years of managed decline.

Cascadian said...

And lets not forget Socialist International-they will not approve of such radical changes, especially as they have worked hard to encourage the same destructive policies throughout the world. Read this and substitute USA or UK for Sweden then tell me that a guiding hand is not at work to destroy the west.

Anonymous said...


"that a guiding hand is not at work to destroy the west."

Destroy western civilization - oh yeah admittedly it is a long way from perfect but - a little bit of tweaking...... Hitherto, with some help and borrowing deeply from previous glimmers [Minoans, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans-Byzantines]. Henceforward, the enlightenment brought it all together and in a perfect sequence, Steam power harnessed - released man's vast potential, we are made of star dust and back to the stars we were going to go but this time as sentient human being Cosmonauts travellers across the UNIVERSE....And YET?

But why cause it to self destruct? To what end - I cannot fathom but the above link and conclusion - how can there be any doubt of it!

With the dark encroaching so close, will the curtains be drawn by the lunatics of Cultural Marxism, the green agenda or, will it be the curse of the death cult of the eastern creed?

Anonymous said...

Rubbing our faces in it? What about the cost?! To be honest, it is taking the piss:

Think about the astronomical costs, the liabilities of all these useless wastrels pouring in, I was pondering earlier - child benefit is £2,728p/a - say there are about 500, 000 children of Pakistani origin [and counting] ± that's £25 billion in just child benefit over their early lives............

Here, feast your eyes on this and do some projections - as to UK costs and be agape.................

Benefits of mass immigration? Only if you are one.

Anonymous said...

Wilders also pointed out that the cost of each asylum seeker per year is three times the amount Dutch OAPs receive. In reply, the government spokesman said that this was irrelevant [/quote]

DeeDee99 said...

She didn't mean an English Parliament though. Or English Votes for English Laws.

So actually, she didn't mean English Devolution at all. She was talking about decentralisation, just like the Government is, and is mis-labelling it "devolution" to try and kid the English that they will have the same control over laws internal to England that the Scots have with their devolved Parliament.

She may be the acceptable face of Labour; she certainly doesn't gurn at the cameras or have annoying verbal and facial tics. But could you honestly see her as Prime Minister, standing up for British interests in the face of Merkel or Putin?

No - neither can I.

We need Leaders with GRAVITAS. That means people with a bit of life experience .... ie older; who haven't worked in the public sector/politics for 15 years and labelled that "experience."

Not one of the candidates for the Labour leadership is PM material. But then, I'm sure they don't expect to be in Government for a decade. And that would be too soon as far as I'm concerned.