Andy Beckett’s call for Labour to practise “clear-sighted, ruthless politics” (Johnson’s Tories seem to defy reality – but Labour’s ‘realistic’ politics isn’t working, 20 August) could gain traction if it asked what the Conservative party’s worst nightmare might be. Time and time again it has won general elections by appealing to voters with confected nightmare warnings along the lines of “don’t let Labour ruin things”.
Simply reminding voters that Boris Johnson’s administration has been more effective in ruining the country than any other in living memory will not cut it. Neither, it seems, will the charge of incompetence. Somehow the Labour party (and for that matter other non-Conservative parties) must force a change in the terms of debate at a general election.
If a principal part of Labour’s offer were electoral reform and other constitutional updates, this could do it. Traditionally this has been seen as a soft, peripheral issue of little interest to the majority of voters, but it would force the Conservatives to argue openly for the status quo and to defend their own self-interest. It could be quite a ruthless strategy after all.
Geoff Reid
Bradford
• I read your article with interest and dismay (Labour to pledge shake-up of universal credit as part of wider ‘new deal’, 22 August). The government’s misnamed universal credit (it is not universal) is certainly in need of radical and urgent reform, and Labour’s pledge is to be applauded. However, the emphasis of reform remains squarely on conditionality of receipt and promoting work.
There are welcome proposals to reduce the taper rate, but Labour is missing an opportunity for fundamental reform by introducing a universal basic income. Doing so would remove the excessive marginal tax rate for those on low incomes, provide a universal, unconditional income for those out of work, and could be paid for by introducing a progressive tax on higher earners, especially the highest. Universal basic income would also actively challenge the stigma associated with people who claim benefits, and would promote equal citizenship for all. The present system requires reform, but the moral arguments for removing shame, blame and stigma through a universal single citizen approach is compelling. It is a shame that this opportunity has been missed.
Jonathan Parker
Professor of society and social welfare, Bournemouth University
• If Labour’s proposal of “a reduction in the universal credit taper rate, currently set at 63%” was meant to be an example of Keir Starmer’s idea of painting policy in “primary colours”, it actually looks more like a kind of unclear beige. Is the “people’s flag” now deepest magnolia rather than red?
Derrick Cameron
Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
