Nasty Labour

 

 

It is 13 years now since Theresa May warned the Conservative Party not to become “the nasty party.”  She then went on to ignore her own advice  by, as Home Secretary,  introducing her hostile environment, most vividly remembered by vans circulating in areas where immigrants had settled, bearing posters warning those who weren’t convinced of their right to be here to “Go home – or else.! “ Even Nigel Farage thought it was unpleasant.

 Although the vans were rapidly discontinued in the face of a public outcry the hostile environment continues to thrive, though we now have a government by a party which used to claim to believe in the international brotherhood (and sisterhood) of man (and women) and only just over a year ago promised  “change”  if it won the election.

Instead we have the  the proposed introduction of Digital IDs, not for the various conveniences that such measures are alleged to bring (more of which later) but to make it more difficult for immigrants to obtain employment.

There is something bizarre or maybe Kafkaesque (or both) in a party called Labour (the clue is in the name) on the one hand pulling out all the stops to bully disabled people into work, and at the same time trying to prevent largely young, energetic  and enterprising people who want to work from doing so.

And it’s not, as a Liberal Democrat spokesperson has pointed out, all that clear how the measure will deter unorthodox immigration via small boats.  Surely the worries at the forefront of such aspiring migrants’ minds  will be the costs and dangers of crossing the Channel, not the ease or otherwise of getting a job They’ll cross the bridge of getting a job when they get here, should they be lucky enough to make it.

Be that as it may, there can be no doubt that once non-compulsory  IDs for employment purposes are introduced  there will be “mission creep” to extend them to  include a right to rent, a right to use the NHS, right to welfare, right to vote, and, by hook or by crook, eventually, a right to be here at all for everybody, born here or not.

Labour under Tony Blair tried to introduce ID cards.  A coalition led by Liberals fought them off.  We must do so again.  

 At present our government exists with our permission.  Under our inadequate electoral system that permission is rather grudging. Only a third of those who voted actually voted for it and, since the turnout was low, that represents only about 25% of those entitled to vote.  The permission would be more convincing if we had PR and the government could claim the support of a majority, but that’s where we are and Labour lacks the gumption to change it  (I’ve read somewhere that Andy Burnham, who appears to be manoeuvring to challenge Sir Keir Starmer, believes that a “Progressive Majority” comprising Labour, Liberals, Greens and perhaps some Nationalist would have more authority and more courage.  I am sure he is right)

 

Wit compulsory  ID cards the roles are reversed: we exist  by permission of the state – and no prizes for guessing which minorities would be the more pestered by the agents of authority  to prove they had that permission.

“Papers, please has never been part of the British peacetime tradition and Labour should not be allowed to drive a wedge towards authoritarianism.

Rather we need some positive assertions of the valuable contribution immigrants have made and are making to the quality of our lives.

Attending the London meeting of leaders for Global Progressive Action last Friday, Iceland’s prime minister  M/s Kristrún Frostadóttir (the world’s youngest) was asked on the BBC how she had achieved  a Social Democratic victory in a world dominated by far-right populism.  She replied by being positive and telling the truth, not by attacking and criticising her opponents, but by saying what her party believed in and what they would do.

Our leaders  should take a leaf out of the Icelandic book, applaud and promote the values of which we can be proud,  and not resort to feeble and failing attempts to outflank Farage.