Is Labour in land of living?

This is the question which goes to the heart of the Opposition’s eyecatching proposal to offer a one-year tax break to new businesses who agree to pay their staff the “living wage” – a principle championed for 18 months by the Archbishop of York as part of the York Fairness Commission.

After setting the political agenda on household fuel prices, and now promising to scrutinise the water industry’s regulatory challenges, Ed Miliband believes that an interventionist economic strategy can wrong-foot David Cameron over the “cost of living crisis”.

Unlike the Tories, he says utility bills and wage policies cannot be left to market forces because a succession of above-inflation energy increases have highlighted the flaws with a laissez-faire approach to prices.

Astutely, he is citing the example of the minimum wage – a policy which the Tories opposed when it was introduced after Tony Blair’s landslide win in 1997. Now the Conservatives accept that their position was short-sighted.

But the difference between the minimum wage, a policy underpinned by law, and the living wage is that the latter is a voluntary scheme that firms are being encouraged – rather than compelled – to introduce when their finances, and consciences, permit.

With Britain’s economic recovery still in its infancy, Labour will have to be certain that the promise of a £1,000 tax rebate to participating firms does not jeopardise the jobs of individuals in the longer term.

Rachel Reeves, the Leeds MP and Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, says it will make it easier for firms to retain staff and that businesses will honour the “living wage” pay recommendations once this scheme ends.

That remains to be seen. What is not in doubt, however, is that a Miliband government intends to be very hostile towards big business. Labour’s core supporters will welcome this, but the Opposition leader still has to show how his promises to raise corporation tax, freeze heating bills for a year and expand dramatically the scope of the “living wage” on a short-term basis will encourage far more businesses to invest in Britain, and create a new generation of jobs.

Driving pariahs

IT is a sobering thought that the sharp increase in alcohol-related fatal accidents in North Yorkshire, and elsewhere, is in inverse proportion to the decline in the total number of deaths on Britain’s roads each year.

Dave Jones, the Chief Constable of North Yorkshire Police, describes the statistics as “bizarre”. It remains to be seen whether this is a one-off blip or part of a wider trend because motorists are now “desensitised” to hard-hitting TV campaigns warning about the perils of drink-driving.

This appears to be the view of Julia Mulligan, the county’s crime commissioner, who wonders whether the “finger-wagging” that defined New Labour’s “nanny state” approach to social health policy is now becoming counter-productive. She may have a point, and the effectiveness of campaigns should be regularly monitored, as West Yorkshire Police launches its own initiative against dangerous drivers,

But perhaps the root cause is one of complacency. Perhaps those motorists who are still selfish enough to get behind the wheel while under the influence of alcohol, or drugs, believe that there is a lesser likelihood of them being caught, particularly in rural areas, because of an inadequate number of traffic patrols to carry out random checks. It could also be argued that the sentenced passed by the courts no longer offer a deterrent effect, especially in those disturbing instances where repeat offenders escape a custodial punishment.

Either way, this issue must be confronted. Once socially acceptable, there is no justification in the 21st century for drink-driving – offenders are rightly regarded as pariahs – and the police need to reiterate this message before even more innocent people are killed by the social irresponsibility of a selfish and reckless minority.

Ronnie’s return

HOW ironic that the Great Train Robbery, one of the crimes of the last century and a case described as being stranger than fiction, is to become a potential money-spinner for Yorkshire when the BBC marks the 50th anniversary of the audacious heist with a gripping TV dramatisation.

Yet, while the producers say they have gone to great lengths to ensure that the roles of Ronnie Biggs and ring-leader Bruce Reynolds retain their authenticity, a number of local landmarks will feature in the drama.

Because of difficulties re-creating the theft of £2.6m – the equivalent of £46m in today’s money – in Buckinghamshire where a Glasgow to London mail train was ambushed in 1963, various locations have been used for gangland scenes, the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway doubled as the Sears Crossing where the ambush took place and Filey depicts Torquay, the English Riviera resort that became the final hideout for Reynolds.

It could be a rare occasion where crime pays.