Bill Carmichael: Lesson in chaos from Labour

If Labour stood for anything, it was its steadfast opposition to austerity and a commitment to let spending and borrowing rip in an attempt to breathe life into a flatlining economy.

Then shadow chancellor Ed Balls suddenly decided that the cuts were needed after all and that Labour, if elected, would stick rigidly to the coalition’s spending plans.

Not so long ago Labour was also against any attempt to curb the bloated welfare bill, arguing that benefits should continue rising faster than average wages in the name of “fairness”.

Earlier this month this policy was also thrown into reverse with a grinding of gears when Miliband announced he was now accepting the Government’s benefits cap and introducing a new contributory principle into welfare entitlements.

Labour’s strategy, if you can call it that, seems to consist of spending months criticising particular policies as damaging to the country and an attack on the poor – and then suddenly adopting them and hoping nobody will notice.

But at least these two u-turns made some kind of sense. The welfare curbs are immensely popular, especially in working class areas, and nobody trusted Labour to keep control of spending. These policy realignments were a recognition of political and economic realities.

But the third U-turn – on education policy – shows no such logic and indicates a worrying slide into incoherence on the Opposition front bench.

For years Labour, aided by the troglodyte teaching unions, have relentlessly attacked the idea of free schools pioneered by education secretary Michael Gove.

The trouble for Labour is that free schools have proved popular, with scores of them set up by parents, charities, religious groups, universities and businesses.

But instead of simply admitting they got it wrong, Labour has come up with a position that is simply baffling.

In a speech this week, shadow education secretary Stephen Twigg dropped Labour’s opposition to free schools but added that no new ones would be set up.

In the next breath he announced that Labour would back “parent-led academies” and “teacher-led academies”.

What’s the difference? If Labour know they aren’t saying, beyond hints that local education authorities would have more powers to control the new schools.

But the whole point of free schools, and the academies set up under the previous Labour government, is that they are independent of the costly bureaucracy of the LEAs.

So Labour’s schools policy makes little sense. Go to the back of the class.

Not so smart

My invitation to the G8 meeting in Northern Ireland must have got lost in the post, but it was a relief because the dress code was “smart casual”.

I can do smart – suit, crisp white shirt, silk tie and polished shoes; and I can do casual – T-shirt and jeans. But what the heck is “smart casual” when it’s at home?

You might as well tell me to come as “wet dry” or “tall short”.

The world’s leaders, including Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin, demonstrated their individuality by all doing exactly the same thing and taking their ties off.

They might have wrecked the world’s economy and they are dragging us ever closer to another war – but hey, at least they are cool, hipster kind of guys!

Going bare necked is the new orthodoxy. If you really want to show what a rebel you are then you should fight against the “smart casual” grain and wear a tie!