Tories are trashing their core supporters too

On the eve of the Tory Party conference, the anger among their opponents is very much – and rightly – focussed on the impact the coalition is having on the most vulnerable in society.  Unemployment, cuts in jobs and services, privatisation of the NHS, the bullying of the sick and disabled by Atos.  Single mothers are set to lose 20% of their overall income; of course the Left (an ambiguous term, I know) is bound to focus on what looks like a systematic attack on the old, the poor, the sick, women and children.  Tory populists respond by measures to allow faster driving, more bin collections, easier sacking – no Tory prejudice is left unstroked.

In the face of all this, it’s easy to overlook that the poor and vulnerable are not the only victims.  One of the most interesting outcomes is the way in which Tory policies are having a really devastating effect on some of the party’s most loyal supporters; older, hitherto affluent people, living in comfortable suburbia or in the nicer bits of the countryside, often on fixed incomes from private pensions, or from savings.  They’re people who have all the accoutrements of financial comfort, but are increasingly finding life very difficult.

Income from their savings has fallen drastically – and many of them are living off the sort of pension provision that was gambled away by speculating bankers before 2008 (there’s a trope about Gordon Brown’s raids on pension funds, but the total cost of Brown’s dividend tax is about £5bn per year. The cost of the bankers’ crash of 2008 to pension funds is likely to be around £500bn, and that’s before you consider the costs of the contributions holidays that companies regularly awarded themselves).  Many of them are people who were economically active in the Thatcher years, and heeded the calls to privatise their pension provision.  Now they’re facing huge increases in costs of living – double-digit increases in fuel costs – while their income stagnates and falls.  Ironically enough, these people are the backbone of charitable giving, the authentic heroes of the Big Society – but not for long as their income falls and they need to cut back to pay for their daily necessities, or prepare for an uncertain future of NHS cuts and private sector provision.  Some will still have children at university, or who cannot afford a home and are still living with them.

And even their environment is being threatened, as Tories eschew the obvious answer to Britain’s housing crisis – a massive social housing programme focussed on brownfield sites – to allow their friends and donors in the property business to build developments unhindered by considerations of sustainability or local impact on sensitive environments.

In other words, these stalwarts of Tory middle England are being trashed.  No, it’s not the same as the daily struggle faced by the low-paid, or those dependent on benefits as a result of disability, or single mothers. After all, we’re talking about people who own their homes outright and still enjoy a quality of life that is beyond the dreams of the poorest in society.  But the fact that people in their later years are having to count the pennies for the first time does not make their worries any less real.  It’s a telling comment on contemporary Conservatism that the Tory party no longer speaks for these people – in Cameron’s Britain, it’s the financiers and bankers who trashed the economy in 2008 who matter.  It emphasises that for all its attempts at populism, the Tory Party really only speaks for a tiny, financially-empowered minority.

Will these scions of middle England rise up against the party that has deserted them? It remains to be seen.


8 thoughts on “Tories are trashing their core supporters too

  1. Pingback: Tsk, tsk, naughty, naughty

  2. “but the total cost of Brown’s dividend tax is about £5bn per year. The [total] cost of the bankers’ crash of 2008 to pension funds is likely to be around £500bn,”

    What’s the (total) cost of Brown’s dividend tax?

  3. Just how can pension funds which had £235bn invested in the UK stock market at the end of 2006 (very near peak levels) have lost £500bn from the market crash?
    The market has since recovered half it losses so – if they cashed in their chips today instead of waiting for a full recovery – they would be down less than £50bn, not £500bn, and that it a lot less than they have lost from Gordon Brown’s raid which started at £5bn per annum and has grown with inflation, so presumably around £120bn (in today’s money) so far

    • The total value of Britain’s pension funds is estimated to have fallen by between 30% and 40% as a result of the crash – despite having increased enormously (at least doubling and probably increasing by much more than that) during the period 1997-2008, with Brown’s dividend tax clearly not preventing substantial rises in the paper value, at least, of pension funds (some would claim that since the income from that tax was being spent on schools and hospitals and employment rather than inflationary speculation, it was actually providing rather a good social return). UK pension fund paper values were very considerably more than £1 trillion in 2006 and the effect of the 2008 crash is still with us.

      • @ Serenus Zeitblom
        If you don’t like the numbers I quote, may I suggest that you check the data on the ONS site?
        “The total value of Britain’s pension funds is estimated to have fallen by between 30% and 40% as a result of the crash” – estimated by whom? I am using trustworthy data from ONS and, for market movements, the London Stock Exchange. At the end of 2007 the FTSE-100 index was 6457: it fell 46% to to 3512 in March 2009 and has since recovered 51% to 5303. At one time pension were around 75% invested in equities and if that had still been the case then the total paper value of their assets would have fallen by 30% (not more because much of the balance is in gilts whose prices rose). BUT, the actuaries (with vocal support from regulators) pushed the funds to switch out of equities into gilts and bonds as the membership grew older. So the estimate you quote is based on a false assumption.
        PLEASE – Brown’s dividend tax did not stop the paper value of Pension Fund assets rising because he encouraged the ridiculous inflation in paper value of stock exchange assets with his “borrow and spend” policy and savers fled from cash to “real assets” which usually meant either the house they lived in or shares in companies. Brown’s tax reduced employment in wealth-creating private-sector firms by increasing the total cost of employment. If you care to look at ONS data on manufacturing employment you should be horrified that it fell 40% under New Labour

  4. Pingback: Why culture wars are breaking out in the Tory party « Notes from a Broken Society

  5. Pingback: Eastleigh: a fascinating contest « Notes from a Broken Society

  6. Pingback: UKIP, neoliberalism and the revolt of the moderately entitled | Notes from a Broken Society

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s