LFF readers’ message to Ed Miliband: make reducing inequality your priority

Ours is the latest in a slew of polls showing that voters are deeply concerned about inequality

 

In our latest reader poll, we asked what the priority for the next Labour government should be. The result was a decisive one.

A huge 66 per cent of you said that the priority for the next Labour government should be reducing inequality; 34 per cent said improving the NHS; 37 per cent said building more houses; 24 per cent said nationalising the railways and 18 per cent said the environment.

surveyinequality

 (Click on image to enlarge)

Other recent polls too have suggested that inequality is outstripping even the NHS as the primary concern of the electorate over the course of this parliament. Last year the High Pay Centre conducted a survey which showed that 87 per cent of the public think it is important to make society more equal – even more than the percentage who think tax should be cut or immigration reduced.

And in October, a study carried out by YouGov for the Centre for Labour and Social Studies (Class) found that 47 per cent of people think the UK has become less fair under the coalition, while 12 per cent think it is fairer and 31 per cent believe there has been no change.

Under the the Conservative-led government, inequality has increased in several different ways, including:

1. Deeper cuts to local authority spending in deprived areas

This year, an IFS study found that:

“On the whole, it is more deprived areas, those with lower local revenue-raising capacity, and those that have seen the fastest population growth that have seen the largest cuts to spending per person.”

2. Cuts to tax credits

Low income families were hit hardest by tax reforms, which raised the number of hours a parent has to work to claim Working Tax Credit from 16 to 24 hours per week. IFS analysis in January found that tax and benefit changes implemented by the coalition have reduced household income by an average of £1,127 a year, or 3.3 per cent, and that ‘low-income households with children lose the most as a percentage of their income from changes implemented by the coalition’.

3. Tax breaks for the rich

The TUC found in 2012 that, under the coalition, people earning £150,000 or more were enjoying tax breaks worth more than the annual salaries of nearly eight million workers.

4. Benefit sanctions

The punitive sanctions system harms the most vulnerable members of society; a recent study suggested that 100,000 children were affected by sanctions each year, with 100 people verified too mentally ill to work reportedly sanctioned each day. There also have been troubling reports from JSA staff, who claim they are given quotas of sanctions to meet, forcing more people into extreme poverty. 83 per cent of foodbanks report that sanctioning is causing an increase in use.

5. Obscene executive pay

Directors of FTSE 100 companies saw their pay increase by 21 per cent over the last year. On the second day of the working year 2015, the pay of Britain’s top bosses had surpassed the average worker’s annual salary.

 

The list could go on, but you get the picture. The fact that – even with the NHS on the brink, a whole generation for whom owning a house is an impossible dream and the environment in unprecedented danger – people are still singling out inequality as the dominant problem should be the final word on fairness under the coalition.

Ed Miliband has been accused of being anti-business for pointing out that wealth creation will be better if the country is more equal, but he appears to be responding to an urgent cry from the public. The low pay epidemic that the Tories have presided over mean the poorest in society will feel immediate, real differences to their lives if they are voted out.

The Labour leader must show that he is serious about tackling low pay and the inequality it perpetuates by making it a key part of his election pledges. If he is slack on this front, it could leave the door open for UKIP to declare that they alone fight for ordinary people. Inequality is Ed Miliband’s chance to set himself apart.

 Ruby Stockham is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow her on Twitter

7 Responses to “LFF readers’ message to Ed Miliband: make reducing inequality your priority”

  1. littleoddsandpieces

    Labour cannot gain amajority on its own or even with the SNP.

    We then get a second general election this year with the result of a TORY / LABOUR COALITION.

    So the Tories will win by end of the year, as we have seen with the Lib Dem coalition with them.

    HOW SMALL PARTIES OF THE POOR TO THE LEFT

    CAN BRING ABOUT MAJORITY GOVERNMENT

    Never again will a single party or even two parties in coalition bring majority government for the UK parliament.

    What is the norm throughout Europe is multi party coalitions, in arm’s length grouping of parties who keep their own party idehtity. In the UK this is called ‘supply and confidence’, which is what the SNP and Plaid Cymru will offer Labour.

    TUSC / CLASS WAR / SOCIALIST GB / MEBYON KERNOW

    The poor vastly outnumber all other voters in most the UK, but especially in Tory and Lib Dem marginals in England.

    Examples:

    TUSC – Trade Unionist and Socialisty Coalition

    6th biggest party in the UK, but entirely ignored by national media

    LINCOLN

    TUSC – Elaine Smith

    TORY MAJORITY 1,058

    Claimants Count 10,440

    Poor Pensioners – 23,900

    DISABLED VOTERS – 13,899

    Disabled on ESA – 2,730

    Disabled welfare supported

    under 65 – 3,540

    Carers on Benefit – 1,010

    CLASS WAR

    Double dole and pension

    SHERWOOD, NOTTS

    Class War Candidate

    Dave Perkins

    Tory Majority 214

    Working Claimants 8,210

    Poor Pensioners – 27,210

    DISABLED VOTERS – 13,503

    Disabled on Employment and Support Allowance – 3,710

    Disabled welfare supported under 65 – 4,100

    CARERS ON BENEFIT – 1,400

    MEBYON KERNOW

    Cornwall has single figure votes gained by the sitting Tory or Lib Dem MPs that got them into the job in 2010.

    Loveday Jenkin in

    Camborne, Redruth and Hayle

    Tory Majority 66

    Poor pensioners – 33,280

    Working Age Claimants – 2,920

    Carers on Benefit – 2,560

    DISABLED VOTERS – 12,091

    Disabled on Employment and Support Allowance – 5,830

    Disabled welfare supported under 65 – 5,030

    Total Voters About – 63,975

    SOCIALIST GB

    BRIGHTON KEMPTOWN

    Socialist (GB) Jacqueline Shodeke

    Claimant Count 9,360

    Tory majority 1,328

    PLAID CYMRU – Wales
    CARDIFF NORTH – WALES

    Plaid Cymru –

    Elin Walker Jones

    Tory Majority 194

    Working Age Claimants – 5,540

    Poor Pensioners – 33,390

    DISABLED VOTERS – 12,390

    Disabled on Employment and Support Allowance – 6,310

    Disabled welfare supported

    under 65 – 5,030

    CARERS ON BENEFIT – 2,730

    LOGOS OF PARTIES OF THE POOR ON THE LEFT /
    MORE INFO AND LINKS /
    HOW ENSURE REGISTERED TO VOTE

    http://www.anastasia-england.me.uk

  2. TruthBeatsLies

    Great…! That’s exactly what he should be aiming to do…! This country needs a population of no more than 40 million – TOPS…! So that NOBODY – no matter what occupation he or she may have, or TITLE they may hold – ever has an income greater than TWICE as much as ANYBODY else…!!! Because twice as much is plenty of differential for anyone…! Except the filthy, greedy rich, of course – who should be drummed-out of the country anyway…! And ASAP…!!!

  3. Leon Wolfeson

    Ah, reduce the pay of the middle class (while the rich keep their wealth, since it’s not from wages), etc.

    You’d drive out anyone who could flee.

  4. Leon Wolfeson

    My message is he lost my vote at conference when he lead with a benefit freeze for kids, and refused to allow borrowing for council house building.

  5. TruthBeatsLies

    Labour+SNP+the GREENs… that’ll be OK. That aught to do it. Should keep the Tories at bay for the foreseeable, shouldn’t it…?

  6. jack

    So who are you voting for?

  7. Leon Wolfeson

    Arnold Judas Rimmer.

Leave a Reply