Tony Blair will ignore the siren voices of Old Labour calling for higher income taxes

Labour will fight the election on a promise to keep income tax rates unchanged and a lid on NI contributions

Share

Writing a New Labour election manifesto is easy. The first line is: "We will not raise the basic or top rates of income tax." That's what it said last time and the time before. It's negative. It's uninspiring. The party doesn't like it. But everyone knows that it has to be in there. It is the next bit that is harder, the main aim of the exercise being to avoid putting in promises like "We would never dream of bringing in tuition fees. Ever." But the tax bit is easy.

Writing a New Labour election manifesto is easy. The first line is: "We will not raise the basic or top rates of income tax." That's what it said last time and the time before. It's negative. It's uninspiring. The party doesn't like it. But everyone knows that it has to be in there. It is the next bit that is harder, the main aim of the exercise being to avoid putting in promises like "We would never dream of bringing in tuition fees. Ever." But the tax bit is easy.

No surprise, then, that the newspapers reported last week that the income-tax promise would be repeated at the coming election. In Downing Street, work on the Labour manifesto barely paused over the summer. The battles within the Government over it are the big half-hidden story of politics at the moment. And the ground on tax was cleared at the National Policy Forum in Coventry in July, which approved a statement that said - loosely translated - "The policy on tax is whatever Tony and Gordon say it is."

It is a little late, therefore, for the think-tanks of the Labour establishment, the Fabian Society and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), to publish their proposals for higher taxes on the better-off. This is not just a case of bad timing, but of bad politics. At the very moment that the Labour Party is becoming restive about what it regards as the self-imposed bit, bridle and blinkers of tax policy, Labour's tax policy for the election is likely to become even more restricted than before.

This is a prediction, not a snippet of inside information. The policy mechanics working on the manifesto do not like talking about it. But I predict that Labour will fight the next election on a promise not just to keep income tax rates unchanged but to keep the lid on National Insurance contributions too. In effect, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will promise not to increase any form of tax on income.

At the last election, they got away with keeping their options on National Insurance open. Having cut the basic rate of income tax from 23p in the pound to 22p in 2000, they promised not to raise it or the top 40p-in-the-pound rate. But Gordon Brown said nothing about National Insurance. Hardly anyone noticed, and Brown took advantage of the leeway to raise NI contributions last year by 1 percentage point across the board. What was significant was that the 1 per cent applied to all earnings above the "ceiling", currently £31,720 a year, as well as below it.

This was hailed in some quarters as the breaking of the taboo of progressive taxation and the first step towards socialist nirvana. The siren voices of Old Labour were surprised and delighted that a tax rise to pay for the health service turned out to be popular, and argued that this ought to embolden Brown and Blair to go further.

The reason why this modestly egalitarian tax rise means so much to the Labour Party is because it is still traumatised, more than a decade later, by John Smith's shadow budget in March 1992. Smith, as Shadow Chancellor, proposed to get rid of the anomaly by which National Insurance contributions were deducted up to a certain level of earnings, but not increased above that level.

To someone of Smith's Labour vintage, it was a perfectly moderate and fair reform. The vast majority would be better off, and only the best-off tenth of the population would have to pay more. But they would have had to pay a lot more, and the Conservatives aggressively exploited fears that a high-spending Labour Government would hit people much lower down the income scale. Above all, as Bryan Gould, later a hero of the left, put it after Labour lost the 1992 election, the plan was seen as a "cap on aspirations".

That is why even Old Labourites - and the Liberal Democrats - are more cautious now, restricting their demand to a new 50p tax rate on incomes over £100,000 a year. Gordon Brown is said to have argued with Blair for such a policy before the 1997 election. I have always doubted whether he pressed very hard, or whether he would have adopted such a policy had he been the Labour leader. The fact that Blair risked a joke, telling Brown's adviser Ed Balls to "wash your mouth out" for raising such a possibility at a private meeting of the three to decide tax policy in January 1997, suggests that it was not a serious option.

It is not an option at all now, which is why the Fabian Society's renewed call for it this week seems pointless. If the Fabians want to raise taxes on higher incomes, they should focus their argument on raising National Insurance contributions at the top end of the scale. But I suspect that they would be wasting their time on that too. Blair and Brown would be right to rule out that option. One reason they got away with leaving the NI loophole open last time was because the Conservative Party was in such disarray. Now, Michael Howard and Oliver Letwin, the Shadow Chancellor, are better placed to deny them wriggle room.

Firstly, this is because the Tory sums add up this time, which they did not under William Hague and Michael Portillo. But secondly, it is because, despite the success of last year's rise in NI contributions, the national mood on tax has not shifted as much as the wishful thinkers of the left imagine. The mass-market newspapers are full of stories of the intolerable burden on home owners of council tax, stamp duty and inheritance tax. (They are also full of stories of the appalling effects of house-price inflation, which is contradictory because lower property taxes mean higher prices, but never mind.)

I predict, therefore, that Blair will pay no attention to the Fabian Society's plea for a higher top rate of income tax, or to the IPPR's suggestion of higher inheritance tax on larger estates. He explained why during the last election campaign: "It may warm the cockles of some political activists if you go after the very wealthy, but I think it is a misplaced use of political energy. Even if you were to do it, the benefits you might yield in terms of any more could be outweighed by the signals you would send out and the time you would spend trying to do it."

I believe he is right. Last year's rise in National Insurance contributions was certainly important. But it was an opportunistic advance, not a turning of the tide. If the Conservatives have any strategic judgement, they will harry Blair and Brown for a promise not to increase National Insurance contributions further.

They may well succeed. The thinking of both Blair and Brown on this question is still heavily influenced by their experience as junior members of John Smith's shadow Treasury team. And Blair feels more vulnerable than ever to a Conservative Party promising to match Labour spending on the NHS and schools, but squeeze elsewhere, which allows it credibly to promise (slightly) lower taxes. The New Labour way is to redistribute by stealth, and Blair and Brown have been good at it, without recourse to noticeably more progressive taxes on income.

That is the way it will continue to be.

j.rentoul@independent.co.uk

The writer is chief political commentator of 'The Independent on Sunday'

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Recruitment Genius: SEO / Outreach Executive

£20000 - £23000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: Our client is a global marketin...

Recruitment Genius: Junior Estimator

£17000 - £18000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A fantastic opportunity has ari...

Recruitment Genius: Sales Negotiator - OTE £24,000

£22000 - £24000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: An enthusiastic individual is r...

Recruitment Genius: Area Manager - West Midlands - OTE £35,000

£27000 - £30000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: An Area Manager is required to ...

Day In a Page

Read Next
Newspaper stands have been criticised by the Child Eyes campaign  

There were more reader complaints this year – but, then again, there were more readers

Will Gore
 

People drink to shut out pain and stress – arresting them won’t help

Deborah Coughlin
A timely reminder of the bloody anniversary we all forgot

A timely reminder of the bloody anniversary we all forgot

Who remembers that this week we enter the 150th anniversary year of the end of the American Civil War, asks Robert Fisk
Homeless Veterans appeal: Former soldiers pay their respects to a friend who also served

Homeless Veterans appeal

Former soldiers pay their respects to a friend who also served
Downfall of Dustin 'Screech' Diamond, the 'Saved By The Bell' star charged with bar stabbing

Scarred by the bell

The downfall of the TV star charged with bar stabbing
Why 2014 was a year of technological let-downs

Why 2014 was a year of technological let-downs

Security breaches and overhyped start-ups dominated a year in which very little changed (save the size of your phone)
Cuba's golf revolution: But will the revolutionary nation take 'bourgeois' game to its heart?

Will revolutionary Cuba take 'bourgeois' golf to its heart?

Fidel Castro ridiculed the game – but now investment in leisure resort projects is welcome
The Locked Room Mysteries: As a new collection of the genre’s best is published, its editor Otto Penzler explains the rules of engagement

The Locked Room Mysteries

As a new collection of the genre’s best is published, its editor explains the rules of engagement
Amy Adams on playing painter Margaret Keane in Tim Burton's Big Eyes

How I made myself Keane

Amy Adams hadn’t wanted to take the role of artist Margaret Keane, because she’d had enough of playing victims. But then she had a daughter, and saw the painter in a new light
Ed Richards: Parting view of Ofcom chief. . . we hate jokes on the disabled

Parting view of Ofcom chief... we hate jokes on the disabled

Bad language once got TV viewers irate, inciting calls to broadcasting switchboards. But now there is a worse offender, says retiring head of the media watchdog, Ed Richards
A look back at fashion in 2014: Wear in review

Wear in review

A look back at fashion in 2014
Ian Herbert: My 10 hopes for sport in 2015. Might just one of them happen?

Ian Herbert: My 10 hopes for sport in 2015

Might just one of them happen?
War with Isis: The West needs more than a White Knight

The West needs more than a White Knight

Despite billions spent on weapons, the US has not been able to counter Isis's gruesome tactics, says Patrick Cockburn
Return to Helmand: Private Davey Graham recalls the day he was shot by the Taliban

'The day I was shot by the Taliban'

Private Davey Graham was shot five times during an ambush in 2007 - it was the first, controversial photograph to show the dangers our soldiers faced in Helmand province
Revealed: the best and worst airlines for delays

Revealed: the best and worst airlines for delays

Many flyers are failing to claim compensation to which they are entitled, a new survey has found
The stories that defined 2014: From the Scottish independence referendum to the Ice Bucket Challenge, our writers voice their opinions

The stories that defined 2014

From the Scottish independence referendum to the Ice Bucket Challenge, our writers voice their opinions
Stoke-on-Trent becomes first British city to be classified as 'disaster resilient' by the United Nations

Disaster looming? Now you know where to head...

Which British city has become the first to be awarded special 'resilience' status by the UN?