A Marriage of Inconvenience

Miliband is saying that Labour should listen more to trades unions. In reality, I don't think they have much choice any more.

In order to save the Labour Party, it was all but married to Unite last year. Yes, that's right. We heard a lot about building societies being bailed out by Nationwide, and banks being taken over by others because of their debts. All marriages of convenience, of course. What we heard less about was Labour almost going under with their crippling debts. Unite stepped in and promised to honour Labour's debts. For ever.

So, no pay freezes in the public sector in the (extremely unlikely) event of a Labour election victory. Forget the efficiency savings, and necessary cost cutting. It would be full steam ahead and spend, spend, spend - and let the private sector take all the pain.

Another marriage made in hell. I hate to think what they are already discussing in their pillow talk:

"A word in your ear, Darling"
"Yes, sweetie?"
"Let's have massive tax rises right across the board - how about a basic rate of 40%?"
"But the voters will never swallow that, dearest"
"Oh, who cares? We've got a whole parliament ahead of us, and remember who holds the purse strings. Let's have an 80% top rate too."
"Oh, okay, then. Er, isn't that a bit much also?"
"No, it's too lenient if anything. Perhaps we should go for 90% instead."
"You know best, dear."

Well, maybe not. But there is much talk of dishonesty about public spending at the moment. We have no choice, cuts need to be made, and I have little doubt that the Tories will make them. Probably by more than 10% too. Actually, so will Labour. So maybe Brown's talk of Tory cuts and his pretence that these cuts won't happen under him is just to appease Labour's new bedfellows?

Expect more lies, damned lies and statistics from all sides all the way up to the election.