This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/12/relaxing-hunting-ban-retoxify-tories
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Relaxing the hunting ban could retoxify the Tories | Relaxing the hunting ban could retoxify the Tories |
| (1 day later) | |
| Related: Top Tory leads rebellion against relaxation of foxhunting ban | Related: Top Tory leads rebellion against relaxation of foxhunting ban |
| It nearly happened in 2013. Two years ago, George Osborne and his circle came close to recommending the introduction by the coalition of a national living wage – a pay floor that was decent rather than merely survivable. But, on that occasion, the chancellor stayed his hand for two reasons. | It nearly happened in 2013. Two years ago, George Osborne and his circle came close to recommending the introduction by the coalition of a national living wage – a pay floor that was decent rather than merely survivable. But, on that occasion, the chancellor stayed his hand for two reasons. |
| First, the Liberal Democrats would not have tolerated the welfare cuts that Osborne’s Tory team considered an essential corollary of a compulsory living wage. Second, he knew that the Lib Dems would claim credit for the measure, a “compassionate” sweetener for Tory austerity, and spin the line that Nick Clegg had argued for a higher rate per hour than David Cameron and Osborne would allow. According to one ministerial ally of the chancellor: “We knew we’d be reading in the press the weekend after the budget that Nick had pressed for £10.” | First, the Liberal Democrats would not have tolerated the welfare cuts that Osborne’s Tory team considered an essential corollary of a compulsory living wage. Second, he knew that the Lib Dems would claim credit for the measure, a “compassionate” sweetener for Tory austerity, and spin the line that Nick Clegg had argued for a higher rate per hour than David Cameron and Osborne would allow. According to one ministerial ally of the chancellor: “We knew we’d be reading in the press the weekend after the budget that Nick had pressed for £10.” |
| Those who claimed angrily, or gleefully, that the jackdaw-ish Osborne had lifted the measure from Ed Miliband’s manifesto were misinformed. This plan has been brewing for years. But – in Osborne’s view – it could only be successfully delivered by a Conservative majority government. | Those who claimed angrily, or gleefully, that the jackdaw-ish Osborne had lifted the measure from Ed Miliband’s manifesto were misinformed. This plan has been brewing for years. But – in Osborne’s view – it could only be successfully delivered by a Conservative majority government. |
| Its radicalism is still sinking in, I think. On the left there is a predictable reluctance to call it a “living wage”, and an insistence that it is insufficiently high to compensate for the cuts elsewhere in last week’s budget. Much more important than the transient arithmetic, however, is the implicit permanence of the institution. Can you imagine any chancellor in the foreseeable future abolishing the new compulsory living wage? Just as the Tories were forced to accept the national minimum wage, which they had once declared an apocalyptic destroyer of jobs, so all future governments will have to embrace the national living wage. | Its radicalism is still sinking in, I think. On the left there is a predictable reluctance to call it a “living wage”, and an insistence that it is insufficiently high to compensate for the cuts elsewhere in last week’s budget. Much more important than the transient arithmetic, however, is the implicit permanence of the institution. Can you imagine any chancellor in the foreseeable future abolishing the new compulsory living wage? Just as the Tories were forced to accept the national minimum wage, which they had once declared an apocalyptic destroyer of jobs, so all future governments will have to embrace the national living wage. |
| Related: With her cynical foxhunting vote, Sturgeon has joined the Westminster club | Simon Jenkins | |
| For now, Labour rages about Osborne’s raid into the natural terrain of the centre-left and declares the whole exercise a monumental con. But the party’s energies would be better expended deciding whether a Labour business secretary would necessarily set a higher wage than £9 per hour – the rate that Osborne has pledged it will reach in 2020. Inescapably, this is a progressive mechanism with Tory dabs all over it: the sooner the left concedes this and moves on, the better. | For now, Labour rages about Osborne’s raid into the natural terrain of the centre-left and declares the whole exercise a monumental con. But the party’s energies would be better expended deciding whether a Labour business secretary would necessarily set a higher wage than £9 per hour – the rate that Osborne has pledged it will reach in 2020. Inescapably, this is a progressive mechanism with Tory dabs all over it: the sooner the left concedes this and moves on, the better. |
| On the right, there is precisely the perplexity that you would expect to be triggered by a measure so brazenly at odds with standard Conservative ideology. The national living wage is a significant intervention in the operations of the free market, a big stick poked in the supposedly sacrosanct work of supply and demand. It brushes aside the invisible hand and accrues to the state a power of income regulation that makes second-generation Thatcherites feel distinctly queasy. Were it not for the flipside of sweeping welfare reform the Conservative party might not swallow it. As it is, the sheer political appeal of the idea is (mostly) sweetening the cognitive dissonance. For the moment, the right is still trying to work out what is going on. | On the right, there is precisely the perplexity that you would expect to be triggered by a measure so brazenly at odds with standard Conservative ideology. The national living wage is a significant intervention in the operations of the free market, a big stick poked in the supposedly sacrosanct work of supply and demand. It brushes aside the invisible hand and accrues to the state a power of income regulation that makes second-generation Thatcherites feel distinctly queasy. Were it not for the flipside of sweeping welfare reform the Conservative party might not swallow it. As it is, the sheer political appeal of the idea is (mostly) sweetening the cognitive dissonance. For the moment, the right is still trying to work out what is going on. |
| I am indeed a townie … But I know the smell of political dung when it reaches my nostrils | I am indeed a townie … But I know the smell of political dung when it reaches my nostrils |
| Step back and you can see that Osborne is not so much shrinking the state as redistributing some of its responsibilities. Hence, for instance, the BBC will pay for the free television licences of over-75s. In precisely the same spirit, the tax credit system will be partly replaced by a very straightforward new obligation upon employers to pay their staff decently. If the Tories’ political opponents do not think that obligation is heavy enough, let them secure office and increase it. If Labour wishes to restore the tax credits that Osborne has cut, it must learn to win again so that it can take such decisions. But, amid all the sneering, the opposition should consider the hard path the Tories have had to follow to reach this point. The inescapable fact is that Osborne is trusted to introduce a national living wage because – like it or not – his party is associated with economic competence, and Labour is not. | Step back and you can see that Osborne is not so much shrinking the state as redistributing some of its responsibilities. Hence, for instance, the BBC will pay for the free television licences of over-75s. In precisely the same spirit, the tax credit system will be partly replaced by a very straightforward new obligation upon employers to pay their staff decently. If the Tories’ political opponents do not think that obligation is heavy enough, let them secure office and increase it. If Labour wishes to restore the tax credits that Osborne has cut, it must learn to win again so that it can take such decisions. But, amid all the sneering, the opposition should consider the hard path the Tories have had to follow to reach this point. The inescapable fact is that Osborne is trusted to introduce a national living wage because – like it or not – his party is associated with economic competence, and Labour is not. |
| It has taken Cameron and Osborne a decade to get here. Last week’s budget was the apotheosis of a modernising strategy that many in the Tory movement thought unnecessary in the first place, or obsolete after the financial crash. The strategy has been stop-go, often subordinated to tactical considerations (the scorning “green crap” was a particular low point). But it has never been abandoned. The legalisation of same-sex marriage in 2013 was one of Cameron’s finest endeavours, evidence that he remained committed to leading a party of the 21st century rather than a heritage society or an ideological sect. | It has taken Cameron and Osborne a decade to get here. Last week’s budget was the apotheosis of a modernising strategy that many in the Tory movement thought unnecessary in the first place, or obsolete after the financial crash. The strategy has been stop-go, often subordinated to tactical considerations (the scorning “green crap” was a particular low point). But it has never been abandoned. The legalisation of same-sex marriage in 2013 was one of Cameron’s finest endeavours, evidence that he remained committed to leading a party of the 21st century rather than a heritage society or an ideological sect. |
| It is therefore frustrating that, little more than two months after its election, his government is proposing to relax the hunting ban. The amendment to the 10-year-old legislation would allow an unlimited number of hounds to be used to flush out foxes in certain circumstances, including – my favourite – for “research and observation”. Imagine, if you will, Jorrocks getting down to a bit of R&D. Researching what, exactly? | It is therefore frustrating that, little more than two months after its election, his government is proposing to relax the hunting ban. The amendment to the 10-year-old legislation would allow an unlimited number of hounds to be used to flush out foxes in certain circumstances, including – my favourite – for “research and observation”. Imagine, if you will, Jorrocks getting down to a bit of R&D. Researching what, exactly? |
| I am indeed a townie, and freely admit that vermin control is not a problem with which I routinely wrestle. But I know the smell of political dung when it reaches my nostrils. This so-called “statutory instrument” is a shoddy concession to a special interest group which had multiple opportunities to stop the original bill, fought ferociously to thwart its enactment – and lost. | I am indeed a townie, and freely admit that vermin control is not a problem with which I routinely wrestle. But I know the smell of political dung when it reaches my nostrils. This so-called “statutory instrument” is a shoddy concession to a special interest group which had multiple opportunities to stop the original bill, fought ferociously to thwart its enactment – and lost. |
| All credit to the sports minister, Tracey Crouch, for encouraging her colleagues to oppose the amendment in Wednesday’s free vote. Dominic Raab, the justice minister, is a robust defender of our ancestral liberties: he just doesn’t see the need to restore the freedom to hunt foxes with hounds – which is what the amendment would do in practice. | All credit to the sports minister, Tracey Crouch, for encouraging her colleagues to oppose the amendment in Wednesday’s free vote. Dominic Raab, the justice minister, is a robust defender of our ancestral liberties: he just doesn’t see the need to restore the freedom to hunt foxes with hounds – which is what the amendment would do in practice. |
| It is hard to exaggerate what a retrograde step it would be for the first new Conservative government in 23 years to do something so feeble, so self-defeating and so crass. The detoxification of a party is very hard to achieve and very easy to ruin. The introduction of a national living wage was a true landmark in the history of Conservatism and, potentially, of the country. Its form, content and impact will be a huge political issue for years, perhaps for decades. | It is hard to exaggerate what a retrograde step it would be for the first new Conservative government in 23 years to do something so feeble, so self-defeating and so crass. The detoxification of a party is very hard to achieve and very easy to ruin. The introduction of a national living wage was a true landmark in the history of Conservatism and, potentially, of the country. Its form, content and impact will be a huge political issue for years, perhaps for decades. |
| For the first time, the modern party has a chance to persuade the voters that its interest in social justice is more than cosmetic. So, I ask you: at this, of all moments, does it really make sense for Toryism to put on its frayed stock and scarlet frock coat and remind us all of a gruesome past? | For the first time, the modern party has a chance to persuade the voters that its interest in social justice is more than cosmetic. So, I ask you: at this, of all moments, does it really make sense for Toryism to put on its frayed stock and scarlet frock coat and remind us all of a gruesome past? |