Brown's pitch to the IT workers he helped to decimate

This link gives a link to a rather pathetic article by the bringer of IR35 and mass IT immigration for the votes of IT workers. ( I assume its one of the approved Brown Balls team cabal who penned it. )

It also shows one of Labour's key delusions and failures.

The delusion is that government's create jobs.

The failure is that even those jobs that were created in the private sector ( by any and all means ) seem to have gone to foreigners.

But none of this will stop Labour from trying to pull the "White heat of technology" ploy again.

They know it doesn't work - for the country - but hope it might work for them.

This is a pattern repeated in so much else of what Labour does and explains, in part, why they are unfit to hold office.

Its Monday - so it must be govt wasting £500 million on a half baked scheme to buy it votes day

As I have just argued the current Labour Government is obsessed by "the narrative" and finds reality annoying and just plain disloyal.

Hence we have the as bad as useless scheme to spend £500 million on a combination of itself ( training job centre staff etc ) and some sort of bribe on getting the long term unemployed into work.

Firstly who knows if this is a another reannoucement ? On past form much of it probably is.

Next £2.5 k per employee taken on is a drop in the ocean for most employers, especially compared to the cost of employing someone they don't want or worse need to get rid of. Lets assume very conservatively that with support costs an employee, of the type of jobs we are talking about, will cost about £25k/yr - all support costs added in - thus the cost of an empoyment mistake and the opportunity cost of not having a good employee dwarf the governments bribe. My guess is that this bribe has been set at a level to allow the biggest number of people who Gordon has "done something to" to grab the headlines.

Also they are playing a zero sum game - trying to change the way the unemployed rotate, rather than doing something like cutting Coporation tax that might help business grow ( or suffer less ). On this subject the ignoring of the Conservatives idea on delaying VAT repayment from business is just spiteful not invented hereism by Labour.

And there are further objections from Labour MP Frank Field who correctly points out that non-EU immigration is crushing the incentives for people to up their skills. Of course the same thing applies for EU immigrants with most empoyers preferring work hard Poles to our unskilled alternative.

All in all the only thing we know is that we all will owe £500 million more to Saudi and Chinese investors in govt debt soon, the figure we can't be sure of ( as David McNulty shows Govt propoably don't know themselves ), but we do know it will have to be repaid with interest by all of us under a Conservative govt.

Update: I note that Gordon Brown kicked of his summit for jobs in the science museum - yep its the white heat of technology ploy from Labour again.

Further: Guido has reproduced the press release from Tony McNulty (Nov 08) condemning a very similar plan by the Conservatives. As you'll see from the above I agree with McNulty on his criticism of both plans.

His press release is here: ( Guido is just a hero for coming up with this ).

Press release
Tuesday 11 November 2008
For immediate use

Tories making headlines on the hoof - McNulty

Tony McNulty MP, Labour's Employment Minister, responding to the Tory announcement on unemployment said: "This is desperate stuff from the Tories, who continue to scrabble around trying to find a coherent economic policy.

"There is no way they can get 350,000 new jobs out of these proposals. There are too many restrictions being applied, the incentive is too small and many of these 'new' jobs will simply displace other people seeking work.

"In addition, the Conservatives just cannot pay for this tax cut - it is misleading of Cameron to say he can pay for getting the short-term unemployed back into work by using figures of savings you would make from the long-term unemployed.

"Osborne's judgment is wrong yet again. They are making headlines on the hoof and they will be found out. "They need to make their sums add up - particularly at such a difficult time for the global economy."

ENDS
Editor's notes:
1. Their figures on how many jobs would be created are complete fantasy. The Tory plan assumes that an employer would create a new job for someone unemployed for more than a year for just £2500. The Tories have failed to take account of the displacement of workers who would have gotten jobs anyway. Currently 60% of people come off job seekers allowance within three months - this number would drop dramatically under Conservative proposals as employers would be incentivised to overlook people who have been out of work for 13 weeks or less. -

Fantasy narratives - failing economy

The video of a clip with Tony NcNulty ( Employment minister apparently ) below was highlighted else where at the time, but I've just re-watched it and I think it tells us something important about the current Labour regime.

If you've never seen it before watch it then I'll carry on my point below:



Firstly I have to say I have had the same experience as Tony McNulty's having here with a boss who was a cross between Jeremy Paxman and Alan Sugar. It a mistake you only ever make once, and if your still in employment afterwards you make damn sure your on top of your facts there after.

Tony McNulty is normally a much more assured media performer. But Paxo's right - as employment minister he should have known those details. It rather leaves two possible interpretations:
1) He's not doing his job and should resign.
2) He was not closely involved in the preparation of the announcement and is having to clear up the mess. ( If I were a minister who had been so sidelined I would raise hell and demand assurances that such a thing would never happen again and if I didn't get them resign. )

But now combine this botched announcement with the spin on the graduate internships the government has announced. It proudly used the names of Barclay's and Microsoft - and yet a day latter we discover that neither company will do anything different from what it has done in the past ( ie no new places - just allowing the government to put a cover sheet on their own actions and try to sell it as a new initiative ).

This is the government of the media grid. Establishing the narrative, but neglecting the facts on the ground. Spin before and over truth. Perhaps we should all castigate ourselves that this still shocks us after almost eleven years of Labour.

But worse is to come. The McNulty interview and especially the attention to Rolls Royce with Brown's expensive campaigning on the taxpayers expense visits. We are about to get a reheated version of "the white heat of technology" ploy that Wilson tried to pull on the electorate.

The new jobs will be in green technology, computers etc and from the way he speaks its clear he view it as governments role to bring this about. Or at least it will be the narrative to be used to full the government media matrix's for the next few months.

The reality will of course be very different.

The government doesn't know what its doing. They are making it up as they go along, and anyway what they are really thinking about is how to coble together a narrative that can hold together long enough to get themselves re-elected. As the interview above makes all too terribly clear.

Further: As if to make my point for me - see this quote attributed to an article by Peter Mandelson over on the Daily Dolly:

"Voters know that it is right to plan and invest for the upturn: ensuring that future jobs and growth come from new innovations in areas such as environmental technology, high-tech manufacturing and the creative industries. I am glad that, at least when it comes to the latter, the Labour party itself is now moving to the forefront of new media and online campaigning."

You see the combination of the "White heat of technology" ploy combined with their real interests - not will it work - but can it be used to win an election.

We know government is bad at picking winners (see 1970's), and also that recessions perform an important role in realigning capital to more productive areas. Government interference guarantees the economy will learn little and come out weakened.