Read our panel's responses to the Conservative manifesto launch
Who will win on May 7th? Sign up for our live video debate with YouGov's Peter Kellner to find out
Today, the Labour party launched its manifesto with a speech by Ed Miliband in Manchester, attended by the Shadow Cabinet. While few voters will have been watching, Miliband's team will be pleased with the good appraisal his performance received from the press.
You can read the full manifesto document here and the full text of Miliband's speech here, but below we've outlined some key points, plus snap reactions from a panel of Prospect writers.
A "budget responsibility lock" Labour have made a specific commitment to cutting the deficit every year, ensuring every promise in the manifesto is costed and introducing "strong fair fiscal rules" to tackle the national debt. Ed Balls, speaking on Today this morning, also committed to eliminating the current budget deficit by 2020. This all marks a significant hardening of Labour's economic language.
Raising the minimum wage to more than £8 per hour by October 2019 That's not a whole new policy, but it is a new timetable—previously Labour had promised to do this by 2020.
A one year freeze on rail fares Labour's manifesto outlines plans to reform Britain's transport system, with a review of the way in which contracts to run rail services are tendered and greater allowances for the public sector to take control of the railways. While they implement these reforms, they'll freeze fares next year, following which there'll be a cap on fares rises.
No rise in the basic or higher rates of income tax, VAT or National Insurance From where we're sitting, it looks like these have all been announced before. But this is a key part of Labour's attempt to dispel its big-spending, high-tax image, so the fact that they are emphasising them is interesting in itself.
Working tax credits will rise in line with inflation from next year These are benefits granted to low-wage workers to top up their salary. One major criticism of the current government has been that it has cut state support not only for those who don't work, but for many of those who do.
A National Primary Childcare Service Labour have already pledged that they will guarantee access to "wrap-around childcare"—breakfast and after-school clubs—from 8am-6pm, a measure aimed at helping working parents who can't afford private help with their kids. This specific new commitment promises to increase the amount of such childcare available; the NPCS will be a not-for-profit organisation dedicated to matching much-needed volunteers with primary school pre and post-school clubs.
Peter Kellner, President of YouGov and Prospect blogger
This was Ed Miliband’s most confident and polished performance for a long time. Politically, he realises there are two negatives which Labour needs to address—the first is him and the second is the party’s economic competence, or their lack of a reputation for economic competence. Today was clearly about the second objective—persuading people that Labour would be responsible with the economy, hence the promise of a triple lock on deficit reduction.
He is taking two gambles—the first is that by going for responsibility rather than an optimistic vision, there is a risk people will not be sufficiently inspired by the idea of a better country after years of austerity.
The second gamble was to say that Labour is “pro business but not pro business as usual”. All their policies, aside from the freezing of small business rates, will curb business. Whether it’s raising the minimum wage, abolishing zero hours contracts or freezing energy prices.
There’s an old poem which says; “Moderation is fine I’m all for that of course, I see the bridle and the bit but where’s the bloody horse.” In this case where is the agenda which supports good business? I think he has left himself open to criticism on that and I imagine that is what the Conservatives will focus their response on.
Progress but still work to be done for women
Vicky Pryce, Chief Economic Adviser at CEBR and co-author of “Why Women Need Quotas”
The impact of the implied spending cuts in government departments other than the protected ones mean that women could be disproportionately affected as they dominate various parts of the public sector. But at least if Labour implement all the pledges in their manifesto including raising the free childcare allowance from 15 to 25 hours for three and four year olds, doubling the amount of time fathers get for paid paternity leave from two to four weeks, and requiring large companies to publish their gender pay gap, this would help redress the difficulties faced by women in Britain at present. I would have liked there to be a provision for the introduction of quotas to help increase the number of women in professions such as politics and business, but Labour are keen not be seen as anti-business currently. But, they do state right at the front of the manifesto that they are focused on gender and racial equality. I believe there is scope in what they are saying for them to do more in the future.
There's plenty here for young people
Oliver Sidorczuk, Director at Bite the Ballot
A big criticism of Miliband is that he's taken five years to do this policy review, but as he actually seems to have listened to young voters' concerns, the manifesto's really pleasing.
The "supporting the next generation" section hits the youth issues on the head. It's not the pessimistic "generation gap" rhetoric that you sometimes get from politicians. The focus on apprenticeships, and particularly, the need for quality apprenticeships came up prominently during our "My Manifesto" survey, in which we asked 5,000 13-24 year olds what was important to them in 2012.
In the "a better politics" section, Labour include a lot of policies we've recommended. There's the vote for 16 and 17 year olds accompanied by citizenship education and voter registration in schools, and the emphasis on making sure the transition to Individual Electoral Registration (IER) is properly implemented so that young voters don't "fall off." Labour's pledge to explore automatic voter registration is interesting and should seek to take full advantage of the shift to online registration. Their proposal to move to block registration by universities and Further Education colleges is worth pursuing, too. This shows that the transfer to IER can be reformed around the edges, without removing the importance of the individual's responsibility.
In terms of what's missing, their broader curriculum proposals need to be implemented across all schools, not just non-free schools and academies. If they really think that things like compulsory sex education, stamping out homophobic bullying and citizenship education are vital, then they should be across the board.
No economic chaos—but will it make us stronger?
George Magnus, independent Economist and author
There is no argument about Labour’s intention to champion fairness by means of a redistributive agenda. The proposals for tax rates, rail, tuition and other charges, new revenues, the treatment of non-doms, raising the minimum wage, the provisions for new apprenticeships and childcare bear testament to that goal.
Whether Labour’s manifesto is compatible with a stronger economy is more contentious. Getting the national debt to fall with a surplus on the current budget is rhetoric, not economics. Excluding public investment from the fiscal maths means continued deficits which will keep national debt rising. The UK would need exceptional growth over the next five years to run a current surplus, sustain or boost public investment, and lower national debt.
The manifesto’s proposals to strengthen the economy could gain traction from the intention to boost productivity and change the governance culture of short-termism. But the ideas here are inevitably vague and some are contradicted by Labour’s own short-termist approach to "mending broken markets."
This manifesto won’t help the Tories paint Labour as the harbinger of economic chaos. It is consistent with the UK economy muddling along, growing incrementally faster but debt reduction taking longer. The acid test is whether its stands up to the tests of being knocked off course by a downturn before 2020, being constrained by its refusal to consider higher revenues from the most important taxes, and being undermined by the SNP if Labour were in a minority government.
They're wrong on the deficit
Anatole Kaletsky, Chairman of the Institute for New Economic Thinking
If Michael Foot's manifesto in 1983 was the longest suicide note in political history, Ed Miliband's is the shortest. With just two bullet-points on the first page of his manifesto, Miliband has provided a cast-iron reason not to vote Labour. "Labour will: • Balance the books and deliver a surplus on the current budget and falling national debt as soon as possible in the next Parliament... • Ensure every commitment in our manifesto is fully funded, with no additional borrowing."
If taken literally, this means that Labour cannot offer anything better than the present government in terms of national economic recovery, productivity or living standards. Labour's economic analysis is now explicitly endorsing the Tories' pre-Keynesian policy of deflating demand with tax hikes and public spending cuts, at the same time as the private sector curbs its borrowing and spending, while monetary policy can do nothing to compensate for the persistent weakness of demand.
If Labour genuinely want to see "national debt falling as soon as possible," they are committing Britain to the economically illiterate policy that Europe has imposed on Ireland, Spain and Greece. In which case, there can be no hope of recouping the immense losses of output, equivalent to around 15 per cent of GDP or £5,000 per household, that Britain has suffered from the longest recession in history.
The only difference between the parties now is how the pain will be shared out. The Tories promise of cuts in public spending lack credibility and are unlikely to be delivered by a weak government in a hung parliament. Labour's proposed tax hikes, by contrast, are easily legislated since they are backed by most of the small parties. A Labour government would probably impose tougher budget discipline and tighter fiscal policy than a Tory minority or coalition. That can only mean even less economic growth, lower living standards and even less money to spend on public services if the Labour manifesto truly means what it says.
A cautious approach to policy
Emran Mian, Director of the Social Market Foundation
The inner chapters of this manifesto don’t contain much that will make civil servants wince. There are only small—and potentially realistic—commitments to public service reform.
No mention of a "National Care Service" to look after people in old age (not to be confused with today's "National Primary Childcare Service") as Burnham and Miliband both hinted at in previous big speeches; just a clever pledge to hire 5,000 home-care workers in the NHS, which will help to keep people out of hospital and reduce demand on services.
No extra details on cutting tuition fees for higher education. There are aspirations on improving vocational education, though, with a neat condition on the promise of an apprenticeship to young people; they have to hold the right grades, whatever those might be.
Equally the section on government reform focuses on changes to the user interface of government—e.g. giving the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds and House of Lords reform—rather than the machinery.
Only a few weeks ago, Labour was saying that it would throw the rail franchising model into the dustbin; in this manifesto it pledges merely to allow a public operator to bid on a level playing field against private companies.
Britain can be better, says the title. But it’s going to take a while, hints the content.
The manifesto reiterates Labour's commitment to recognising Palestine as an independent state alongside Israel. Miliband and his MPs voted to do this last year, but the vote was non-binding on the UK government. This marks one of very few major points of departure from the Tories on foreign policy beyond the EU.
Who will win on May 7th? Sign up for our live video debate with YouGov's Peter Kellner to find out
Today, the Labour party launched its manifesto with a speech by Ed Miliband in Manchester, attended by the Shadow Cabinet. While few voters will have been watching, Miliband's team will be pleased with the good appraisal his performance received from the press.
You can read the full manifesto document here and the full text of Miliband's speech here, but below we've outlined some key points, plus snap reactions from a panel of Prospect writers.
What is Labour promising?
Speaking at the launch today, Miliband said that the manifesto offered not just "a shopping list of proposals," but "seeks to answer the questions you are asking" about the way the country is run. One key criticism of Miliband's Labour leadership has been that he has displayed moments of brilliance, but failed to tie his ideas together in a coherent narrative. The manifesto looks to allay that, knitting together Labour's proposals into a clear offering: "a country where hard work is rewarded, with high skill, high wage jobs. An economy built on strong and secure foundations, where we balance the books." With this document, Miliband dismisses the anti-austerity economic challenge on his left flank from the Greens and the SNP as irresponsible and fantastical, while setting out what Labour would do to address the rampant inequality, social fractures and Little England mentality the party says have worsened under the Coalition.Six "new" pledges
These are being touted by Labour as new commitments or promises.A "budget responsibility lock" Labour have made a specific commitment to cutting the deficit every year, ensuring every promise in the manifesto is costed and introducing "strong fair fiscal rules" to tackle the national debt. Ed Balls, speaking on Today this morning, also committed to eliminating the current budget deficit by 2020. This all marks a significant hardening of Labour's economic language.
Raising the minimum wage to more than £8 per hour by October 2019 That's not a whole new policy, but it is a new timetable—previously Labour had promised to do this by 2020.
A one year freeze on rail fares Labour's manifesto outlines plans to reform Britain's transport system, with a review of the way in which contracts to run rail services are tendered and greater allowances for the public sector to take control of the railways. While they implement these reforms, they'll freeze fares next year, following which there'll be a cap on fares rises.
No rise in the basic or higher rates of income tax, VAT or National Insurance From where we're sitting, it looks like these have all been announced before. But this is a key part of Labour's attempt to dispel its big-spending, high-tax image, so the fact that they are emphasising them is interesting in itself.
Working tax credits will rise in line with inflation from next year These are benefits granted to low-wage workers to top up their salary. One major criticism of the current government has been that it has cut state support not only for those who don't work, but for many of those who do.
A National Primary Childcare Service Labour have already pledged that they will guarantee access to "wrap-around childcare"—breakfast and after-school clubs—from 8am-6pm, a measure aimed at helping working parents who can't afford private help with their kids. This specific new commitment promises to increase the amount of such childcare available; the NPCS will be a not-for-profit organisation dedicated to matching much-needed volunteers with primary school pre and post-school clubs.
Views from our panel
A gamble that could pay offPeter Kellner, President of YouGov and Prospect blogger
This was Ed Miliband’s most confident and polished performance for a long time. Politically, he realises there are two negatives which Labour needs to address—the first is him and the second is the party’s economic competence, or their lack of a reputation for economic competence. Today was clearly about the second objective—persuading people that Labour would be responsible with the economy, hence the promise of a triple lock on deficit reduction.
He is taking two gambles—the first is that by going for responsibility rather than an optimistic vision, there is a risk people will not be sufficiently inspired by the idea of a better country after years of austerity.
The second gamble was to say that Labour is “pro business but not pro business as usual”. All their policies, aside from the freezing of small business rates, will curb business. Whether it’s raising the minimum wage, abolishing zero hours contracts or freezing energy prices.
There’s an old poem which says; “Moderation is fine I’m all for that of course, I see the bridle and the bit but where’s the bloody horse.” In this case where is the agenda which supports good business? I think he has left himself open to criticism on that and I imagine that is what the Conservatives will focus their response on.
Progress but still work to be done for women
Vicky Pryce, Chief Economic Adviser at CEBR and co-author of “Why Women Need Quotas”
The impact of the implied spending cuts in government departments other than the protected ones mean that women could be disproportionately affected as they dominate various parts of the public sector. But at least if Labour implement all the pledges in their manifesto including raising the free childcare allowance from 15 to 25 hours for three and four year olds, doubling the amount of time fathers get for paid paternity leave from two to four weeks, and requiring large companies to publish their gender pay gap, this would help redress the difficulties faced by women in Britain at present. I would have liked there to be a provision for the introduction of quotas to help increase the number of women in professions such as politics and business, but Labour are keen not be seen as anti-business currently. But, they do state right at the front of the manifesto that they are focused on gender and racial equality. I believe there is scope in what they are saying for them to do more in the future.
There's plenty here for young people
Oliver Sidorczuk, Director at Bite the Ballot
A big criticism of Miliband is that he's taken five years to do this policy review, but as he actually seems to have listened to young voters' concerns, the manifesto's really pleasing.
The "supporting the next generation" section hits the youth issues on the head. It's not the pessimistic "generation gap" rhetoric that you sometimes get from politicians. The focus on apprenticeships, and particularly, the need for quality apprenticeships came up prominently during our "My Manifesto" survey, in which we asked 5,000 13-24 year olds what was important to them in 2012.
In the "a better politics" section, Labour include a lot of policies we've recommended. There's the vote for 16 and 17 year olds accompanied by citizenship education and voter registration in schools, and the emphasis on making sure the transition to Individual Electoral Registration (IER) is properly implemented so that young voters don't "fall off." Labour's pledge to explore automatic voter registration is interesting and should seek to take full advantage of the shift to online registration. Their proposal to move to block registration by universities and Further Education colleges is worth pursuing, too. This shows that the transfer to IER can be reformed around the edges, without removing the importance of the individual's responsibility.
In terms of what's missing, their broader curriculum proposals need to be implemented across all schools, not just non-free schools and academies. If they really think that things like compulsory sex education, stamping out homophobic bullying and citizenship education are vital, then they should be across the board.
No economic chaos—but will it make us stronger?
George Magnus, independent Economist and author
There is no argument about Labour’s intention to champion fairness by means of a redistributive agenda. The proposals for tax rates, rail, tuition and other charges, new revenues, the treatment of non-doms, raising the minimum wage, the provisions for new apprenticeships and childcare bear testament to that goal.
Whether Labour’s manifesto is compatible with a stronger economy is more contentious. Getting the national debt to fall with a surplus on the current budget is rhetoric, not economics. Excluding public investment from the fiscal maths means continued deficits which will keep national debt rising. The UK would need exceptional growth over the next five years to run a current surplus, sustain or boost public investment, and lower national debt.
The manifesto’s proposals to strengthen the economy could gain traction from the intention to boost productivity and change the governance culture of short-termism. But the ideas here are inevitably vague and some are contradicted by Labour’s own short-termist approach to "mending broken markets."
This manifesto won’t help the Tories paint Labour as the harbinger of economic chaos. It is consistent with the UK economy muddling along, growing incrementally faster but debt reduction taking longer. The acid test is whether its stands up to the tests of being knocked off course by a downturn before 2020, being constrained by its refusal to consider higher revenues from the most important taxes, and being undermined by the SNP if Labour were in a minority government.
They're wrong on the deficit
Anatole Kaletsky, Chairman of the Institute for New Economic Thinking
If Michael Foot's manifesto in 1983 was the longest suicide note in political history, Ed Miliband's is the shortest. With just two bullet-points on the first page of his manifesto, Miliband has provided a cast-iron reason not to vote Labour. "Labour will: • Balance the books and deliver a surplus on the current budget and falling national debt as soon as possible in the next Parliament... • Ensure every commitment in our manifesto is fully funded, with no additional borrowing."
If taken literally, this means that Labour cannot offer anything better than the present government in terms of national economic recovery, productivity or living standards. Labour's economic analysis is now explicitly endorsing the Tories' pre-Keynesian policy of deflating demand with tax hikes and public spending cuts, at the same time as the private sector curbs its borrowing and spending, while monetary policy can do nothing to compensate for the persistent weakness of demand.
If Labour genuinely want to see "national debt falling as soon as possible," they are committing Britain to the economically illiterate policy that Europe has imposed on Ireland, Spain and Greece. In which case, there can be no hope of recouping the immense losses of output, equivalent to around 15 per cent of GDP or £5,000 per household, that Britain has suffered from the longest recession in history.
The only difference between the parties now is how the pain will be shared out. The Tories promise of cuts in public spending lack credibility and are unlikely to be delivered by a weak government in a hung parliament. Labour's proposed tax hikes, by contrast, are easily legislated since they are backed by most of the small parties. A Labour government would probably impose tougher budget discipline and tighter fiscal policy than a Tory minority or coalition. That can only mean even less economic growth, lower living standards and even less money to spend on public services if the Labour manifesto truly means what it says.
A cautious approach to policy
Emran Mian, Director of the Social Market Foundation
The inner chapters of this manifesto don’t contain much that will make civil servants wince. There are only small—and potentially realistic—commitments to public service reform.
No mention of a "National Care Service" to look after people in old age (not to be confused with today's "National Primary Childcare Service") as Burnham and Miliband both hinted at in previous big speeches; just a clever pledge to hire 5,000 home-care workers in the NHS, which will help to keep people out of hospital and reduce demand on services.
No extra details on cutting tuition fees for higher education. There are aspirations on improving vocational education, though, with a neat condition on the promise of an apprenticeship to young people; they have to hold the right grades, whatever those might be.
Equally the section on government reform focuses on changes to the user interface of government—e.g. giving the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds and House of Lords reform—rather than the machinery.
Only a few weeks ago, Labour was saying that it would throw the rail franchising model into the dustbin; in this manifesto it pledges merely to allow a public operator to bid on a level playing field against private companies.
Britain can be better, says the title. But it’s going to take a while, hints the content.
Two pledges you might have missed
Labour has committed to scrapping the House of Lords and replacing it with an elected "senate of the nations and regions." This seeks to address a range of concerns—the lack of democratic legitimacy in the lords, its inflated size, and the growing sense that Britain's nations and regions need more of a voice to combat the all-powerful South East. Such lofty parliamentary reform ambitions often prove futile, however, as Philip Cowley, Professor of Parliamentary Government at Nottingham University, points out:"Labour will replace the House of Lords with a Senate of the Nations and Regions" (p.69). Good luck with that one...
— Philip Cowley (@philipjcowley) April 13, 2015
The manifesto reiterates Labour's commitment to recognising Palestine as an independent state alongside Israel. Miliband and his MPs voted to do this last year, but the vote was non-binding on the UK government. This marks one of very few major points of departure from the Tories on foreign policy beyond the EU.
