Tory Manifesto - Not Just a Joke

It’s a dirty job, but someone had to read the Tory manifesto.

The first overwhelming impression is the amount of comical, fantastic lies. Do they really expect us to believe them all?

·         LIE. They’ll recruit 50,000 extra nurses.

FACT. 18,500 of these ‘new recruits’ already work in the NHS. There is currently a shortfall of 43,000 nurses.

·         LIE. They’ll recruit 20,000 extra police officers.

FACT. Since 2010 we’ve lost 21,732 coppers so numbers will still be down if they recruit them all.

·         LIE. They’ll build 40 new hospitals.

FACT. They’ll seedfund just 6 new hospitals. In North West London alone the Tories have closed two hospitals since 2010 - Central Middlesex and Hammersmith - and threatened to close the A& Es in Ealing and Charing Cross hospitals.

·         LIE. Parliament prevented Brexit.

FACT. Parliament passed the second reading of Johnson’s rotten deal. He then dissolved it in order to call this election.

The second feature of the Tory manifesto is that it’s all totally uncosted. There are definitely double standards at work here. In addition to Labour’s Manifesto, It’s Time for Real Change, Labour has published a 48 page document called Funding Real Change. This carefully costs every single reform in the manifesto. The Tories are under no such obligation. To say the least they are completely cavalier about their proposals - considering it’s OUR money they’re intending to spend.

Occasionally they come up with an idea that sounds interesting, for instance:

“In particular, we will make the UK the leading global hub for life sciences after Brexit.” 

Not only is this suggestion uncosted; there is not the slightest explanation as to how this ambition is to be achieved, particularly as continental researchers are leaving the UK in droves as they perceive Brexit approaching. After the suggestion above the Tory manifesto moves straight on to the next bullet point.

The manifesto sounds like sweet reason when it is coming up with the most vicious proposals:.

“We will protect the integrity of our democracy, by introducing identification to vote at polling stations...”

 But the Electoral Commission, which regulates voting and political parties says there was “no evidence of large-scale electoral fraud” in 2018... Police investigated 266 allegations in 2018, which led to one conviction and two suspects accepting police cautions.  

So why try to pass a law to deal with a non-existent problem? What the Tories really intend is voter suppression, as is happening in the USA. The people most likely to be hit are those without readily available photo ID - the poor, BAME people and others most likely to vote Labour. This is the opposite of protecting “the integrity of our democracy.” It would be blatant vote rigging. 

The Tories are also anxious to preserve the rights of British expats to vote in UK elections. This is because they regard them as mostly comfortable off retired people likely to vote Conservative. What about non-UK citizens living and working in Britain? There’s no reciprocity. The Tories can see no electoral gains in giving them the right to vote here. It’s all about gerrymandering. 

Then there is this proposal: “It is both right and fair that, as in other countries, people making the UK their home should pay into the tax system for a reasonable period of time before they can access welfare.”

This is a racist dog-whistle. People who come to Britain to work (the vast majority) pay taxes here from day one of their arrival. They do not come here to scrounge. 

The vaguest but most sinister section of the manifesto is on page 48, where it states, “After Brexit we also need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution: the relationship between the Government, Parliament and the courts.”

 In his short period as Prime Minister, Johnson has shown clear bonapartist tendencies. Upon becoming PM he attempted to dismiss Parliament so that it would have no time to discuss his deal. He used the authority of the Queen (Royal Prerogative) to prorogue Parliament and silence his critics. The Supreme Court found his behaviour ‘unlawful’. 

So when the manifesto calls for looking at, “the functioning of the Royal Prerogative”, we have to ask: are the Tories proposing to give the executive more powers to do whatever they feel like? The Royal Prerogative covers a lot. It gives the PM the power to declare war. Parliament has tried to rein this power in after Blair’s catastrophic foray into Iraq. Alarm bells should be ringing at this proposal. Giving more power to Johnson as PM is the last thing we need. 

This section goes on, “We will update the Human Rights Act and administrative law to ensure that there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government.”

This sounds very much like an attempt to water down the Human Rights Act. 

Again, “We will ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays.”

This is a way of saying, ‘Butt out, you pesky judges. We don’t you deciding what is and what isn’t ‘unlawful’.

 During the election Channel 4 ran a debate among party leaders on the environment. Johnson didn’t turn up (Neither did Nigel Farage.). The Tory leader had nothing to say on the subject so he was empty chaired. Then Michael Gove and Johnson’s father (!) turned up with a camera crew to denounce Channel 4. If the Tories get back there is a serious threat to editorial independence of the Channel, and of the press generally through their control of Ofcom.  

So the lies in the Tory manifesto are numerous, pathetic and hilarious. But there is a serious nasty side to what they intend to do if they get in.

What about their programme on the economy? There is very little in their manifesto. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) declares “Should they win this time it is highly likely that the Conservatives would end up spending more than their manifesto implies and thus taxing or borrowing more...The chances of holding spending down as they propose over a five-year parliament look remote.”

The IFS are a bunch of bean counters using flawed neoliberal economic theory. But at least they can count beans accurately. They recognise that the Tory manifesto is a recipe for continued austerity for the next five years. Don’t let it happen.