Labour is still struggling to put its house in order

Published: 11 March 2010

IN the pre-election warm-up Labour boasts of its belief in a flowing fiscal policy.
This is not the time for non-stop conveyor-belt cutbacks in public sector expenditure, say Labour – a balance is needed between selected cuts and planned injections of cash into targeted wings of the ­economy.
Meanwhile, Labour accuse the Tories of planning to cut too deeply and too wildly.
If the government had applied its present policy to the public housing sector – as it had been urged to do in the past three years by economists, pundits and to a large extent by Lib Dem economic “guru” Vince Cable as well as by this newspaper – the property market wouldn’t be in the crisis it is.
If local authorities had been ­given sufficient funds to build homes as well as refurbish existing estates, the construction industry would have been given a significant boost, fringe industries would have benefited and there would have been less unemployment.
In its pre-electioneering frenzy, has Labour become a late convert?
More likely, the Chancellor ­simply wants to spend money in certain fields but, perversely, shows all the signs of keeping the blinds pulled down on housing.
Frustrated, the Camden Tory-Lib Dem coalitionists say they had no choice than to sell-off properties to pay for renewal of estates.
Opponents say that if they had organised a strenuous public ­campaign, a government, ­weakened by unpopularity, may have made concessions.
There is a “maybe” here.
All evidence says direct public investment in housing remains anathema to the government. ­Ideologically, we believe this is still an investment too far for ­Gordon Brown. Complexities enshroud this debate. Finance chief councillor Ralph Scott tried to break through them on Saturday  but not successfully.
The fact is that while, nationally, the Lib Dems’ economic policy makes more sense than the Tories, it is hardly an improvement on Labour’s.