A MOST LAUDABLE POLICY PROPOSAL

Surely no one can possibly say otherwise.

Across the UK, after 10 years of seemingly pointless austerity (during which time the national debt has increased from £800 billion to over £2 trillion) ordinary people have become poorer and the super rich, super richer.

The tales of hungry kids raking through bins for discarded food and  too hungry to concentrate in school and the incredible rise in the number of people obliged to use food banks as a succession of evil DWP ministers have made a succession of vile and disastrous policy changes that make social security more and more difficult to obtain, have shocked many of us.

It would be a hard-hearted person indeed who did not want to ensure that no one went hungry in one of the top 15 rich countries in the world. And so I applaud the policy.

BUT…

I’m at a total loss to see how it could be achieved, or indeed, how it could be paid for.

Who would ensure that people had access to this affordable and sustainable food? How would they do this? Where would they get it? Would supermarkets be obliged to sell this food? How would it differ from other food? Has it been costed? What would be cut to provide the means for this project?

Given how they run their own party, I’m not sure that there would be enough money in the coffers for any luxuries, never mind food for the hungry.

I suspect that Labour, now in the position that the Liberals and later Liberal Democrats were in a few years ago, can make all manner of outlandish promises, safe in the knowledge that they will never have to put them into practice.

++++++++++

And while we are on the subject of Labour’s conference, I noted an interview Richard Leonard gave to STV in which he said that they would nationalise railways, despite opposition from the Tories and SNP, if they were in government.

I’m sure that the Tories don’t want to do this.  But, given the work done by Humza Yousaf when he was Transport Minister, and later comments by Nicola Sturgeon, I’m intrigued to know how he reaches the conclusion that the SNP doesn’t!

I’d also remind him that despite promises from John (now Lord) Prescott in 1997, Labour didn’t renationalise railways during their 13-year London government, and Labour in Wales recently gave the rail franchise to a French/Spanish consortium.

SO, WHAT WITH ONE THING AND ANOTHER…

…THAT WENT WELL, DON’T YOU THINK, KEZ?

Added to what Liam said (above), the conference saw Jeremy, a man I used to respect, being economical with the truth about the EU referendum and harking back to that old chestnut, the Euro. And warning of a hard border turbo-charged austerity and having to eat flags. Jeremy really needs to go read up on the conditions and terms for joining the Euro. He’d find that we couldn’t join it even if we wanted to. As for the hard border, Ed Miliband tried that threat, and what’s he doing these days? The size of his audience reflects the import of what he had to say.

Then we had dear old Sadiq, another guy I had some respect for, lying through his teeth about nationalism and racism. We all know that that ended badly despite Kez  trying to tell us that he didn’t say what he said.

And then there was Kezia bleating on about ‘Stronger Together’ and saying it wasn’t in any way a rehash of Better Together. No Sir, not at all. Entirely different. I mean “better” starts with a B and “stronger” with an S. There, what did I tell you?

I wonder if being Better… sorry Stronger… together no longer refers to being stronger together in Europe. I mean, only a few short months ago Kezia was telling us, as was Ruth, that we were stronger in the EU. And now we, the Scots, who voted to stay in by a whopping majority, nearly 2-1, are, according to Kezia and Ruth, better or stronger (or whatever) apart. Who knows what they will say next week.

I’m beginning to think that the Labour Party’s branch office don’t really have any policies at all, except for Kez’s “F” plan. (No, not Firmer Together or Fairer Together… and no suggestions from you, Conan!)

I’m talking about the Federal plan, which Gordon Brown promised but then they voted heavily against when they had an opportunity to join with the SNP and Greens and get that outcome in the Smith Commission discussions, or in amendments to the Scotland Act where they voted against the SNP’s proposals. Still, a branch office can change its mind, can’t it?

But, seriously, Kez, do you really think the Tories will go for that?

No, me neither.

And when were you imagining that there would be a Labour government in England again?

Yes, me too.

So it’s not exactly much of a plan, is it? In fact, it’s not a plan at all. It’s something to say that you know will never come true, because neither the Tories nor your own MPs will ever vote for it. So basically it’s bullshit.

Still, Stronger Together sounds catchy. It’s a pity that in reality it is “Stuffed Together”.