What a disappointment...

I started the SPP in April 2024 at a time of serious dissatisfaction with the incumbent Conservative government. Not long after Rishi Sunak (in)famously stood in the rain on Downing Street to call the general election, which he had very little hope of winning. Why he thought that this was the right moment I don't know, but I guess, contrary to the famous song that blared out in the background, he felt that things could only get worse from then on.

As a result, it seemed rather self-indulgent to continue to work on the SPP as I was certain that Labour would offer a real alternative, and there would be a raft of changes in policy that would realign the political landscape. Instead, Sir Keir Starmer led his so called "Ming vase" campaign, which I didn't agree with, but could understand - why risk making a misstep when the Tories were already shooting themselves in the foot every other day? Like many I believed that once a majority was achieved, there would be a shift to a more progressive and ambitious Labour party; that they would make a case for, and start to deliver, real change.

Of course, we now know that this wasn't to happen. There is no burning flame for social progress in the current Labour party. Starmer's purge of Corbynites, which was almost certainly necessary to secure election, ended up throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The purpose of securing a Labour government appears to be to try and maintain a Labour government, not to deliver progress for society in general and the disadvantaged in particular. While I have little affection for the maxim "to move fast and break things", it certainly holds more appeal than timidity and paralysis, especially when that results in policies largely indistinguishable from their predecessors'.

I can't recall a defining Labour intervention from the first ten months of their government. About the most impactful change has been to include pensions in estates for Inheritance Tax purposes, although even this will not take effect until April 2027. This will close a significant route for IHT avoidance, which necessarily will only affect the wealthier members of society, and I applaud it, but it is hardly a reform to set the pulse racing for most voters, many of whom would not even have been aware of this method of inheritance planning. Meanwhile, the highest profile change has been the charging of VAT on private school fees, which I remain sceptical about. It is almost the opposite of the pension change - highly publicised and debated, but of little real value other than to make a statement. The additional cost and pressure on state school places is likely to offset any tax gain, and the very richest in society were given the opportunity to pay fees for years in advance anyway, thereby avoiding it. It is also illogical - those who pay for their children's schooling are themselves, or at least come from families who will be, amongst the highest personal tax contributing individuals, yet they choose to forgo their right to a free educational place for their child, thereby reducing government costs; to penalise them for this by taxing them further seems absurd. While I do not believe a separated private educational system is socially healthy, there is no magical way to undo the current set up overnight. This is why the SPP suggests an alternative approach that should help closer integration of the two systems.

I digress. Suffice to say, with Reform making gains and having their first regional mayor as of this morning, and Labour continuing to disappoint, the need for an alternative is clear. While the SPP remains extremely niche, I can only hope it will have some influence in time, and I can no longer remain a frustrated spectator.