Listen to the voters by all means. But recognise that they aren't calling for a cut in child tax credits
As it is apt to do, Twitter went into meltdown yesterday at the announcement by Labour interim leader Harriet Harman that the party would not oppose the Conservative proposal to limit tax credits to two children.
Harman also stated that Labour would not oppose other specifics in chancellor George Osborne’s planned cap on household welfare benefits.
Some of the backlash came from Harman’s contemporaries in the race to be the next Labour leader. Three of the four leadership candidates have so far come out in opposition to the limiting of tax credits to two children, with only Liz Kendall yet to set out her position.
In justifying Labour’s apparent support for Osborne’s plan to cut tax credits, Harman claimed that Labour could not tell the public they were wrong after two general election defeats:
“We cannot simply say to the public you were wrong at the election…we’ve got to wake up and recognise that this was not a blip; we’ve had a serious defeat and we must listen to why.”
In other words, the Conservatives have a mandate from the voters to cut tax credits (and benefits more generally) and therefore the Labour party should ‘listen’ (i.e. vote them through).
The problem is that this analysis doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
It’s certainly arguable, regrettably, that the voters have given the government a mandate for swingeing departmental cuts – the chancellor has even rowed back to some extent on the scale of cuts he promised earlier this year. But there’s no mandate for cutting tax credits for those with children.
First of all quite simply because George Osborne did not tell the electorate prior to the election that he would cut child tax credits – in fact during the pre-election television debates David Cameron promised not to cut child tax credits.
The other reason we should not assume the Tories have a mandate to cut child tax credits is because fresh polling indicates that the public are against cuts to tax credits for those with children.
According to a survey done by Sky News last week, while the public back a cut in the amount of benefits that a household can receive from £26,000 to £23,000, they don’t support a cut in tax credits for those with children. The survey found that 63 per cent of people were opposed to cutting tax credits for those with children. The same number also opposed cutting benefits for disabled people who are working.
So no, there isn’t a public mandate for cutting child tax credits. And while it’s probably correct to say that in many policy areas the public are, regrettably, not in the same place as the Labour party, tax credits for children are not one of them.
James Bloodworth is the editor of Left Foot Forward. Follow him on Twitter
65 Responses to “Harriet Harman is wrong: the Conservatives don’t have a mandate to cut child tax credits”
GhostofJimMorisson
Better because it backs up your assertions? All this proves that politics is never about facts: it’s about perception. We can trade opposing articles all day, but the simple fact is that the Tories have managed to convince a significant number of people that Labour cannot be trusted with the economy; and Ed Miliband convinced few that he was a credible PM. The Tories won the war of perception. In time, Labour will use similar tactics to try and convince the public that the Tories are not fit for office, and on it goes.
Patrick Nelson
Raise the minimum wage now to a living wage and there would be no need for child tax credit and working tax credit. The Tories will never do that because they represent the one’s who would have to pay more.
Patrick Nelson
Apparently you live in a fantasy world of tabloid headlines.
Patrick Nelson
Bull***t there isn’t a single broadsheet that supports Labour at the moment. The Guardian is orange through and through. There is a long list of Tory papers that come out with a barrage of lies, propaganda and attacks against Labour.
Patrick Nelson
Someone needs to persuade the Mirror to start a sister paper for grownups (i.e. with more words and less pictures). They could hoover up the pro-Labour minority of journalists who currently work at the Guardian.