Miliband to flesh out “producer” versus “predator” capitalism idea

31st October, 2011 9:38 am

Ed Miliband will today seek to flesh out his ideas on “producer” versus “predator” capitalism on a visit to engineering company Manthrope in Derby. The visit is part of a series of meetings with businesses across the country that Miliband has been conducting since conference.

According to the Guardian:

Miliband will say the government’s plans to withdraw an annual investment allowance on capital expenditure of over £25,000, saving £1bn in 2015-16, sends out precisely the wrong signals. Labour claims the corporation tax changes favour companies who do not invest in capital. Citing Commons Library research, he will say up to 200,000 businesses will face higher tax bills. Some could pay £30,000 more or face a tax increase of at least 50%.

Miliband will accuse the chancellor George Osborne of pretending that itis not possible to encourage good business practices, while quietly making major changes to the tax system which do the opposite.

He will say: “We must end the fast buck, something for nothing culture so that we can build a new economy that serves the interests of British business, of most people, of the next generation and of our nation as a whole. We need to face facts about the economic orthodoxy that has underpinned British economic thinking for much of the last 30 years.

“Until the financial crisis, it was sometimes seen as inevitable that manufacturing would be in decline because it could not compete with countries where wage costs were lower and that we would become a predominantly service-based economy.”

Value our free and unique service?

LabourList has more readers than ever before - but we need your support. Our dedicated coverage of Labour's policies and personalities, internal debates, selections and elections relies on donations from our readers.

If you can support LabourList’s unique and free service then please click here.

To report anything from the comment section, please e-mail [email protected]
  • Anonymous

    The restriction on the Annual Investment Allowance is a slap in the face for companies who invest heavily in plant and machinery just at the time when the Coalition say they want to rebalance the economy.
    The original 100% First Year Allowance that was in place for years was abolished by the Tories as the City said it discriminated against the financial community since they don’t invest in machinery but people.

    This is typical of this incoherent, PR led idiotic government. I know there are a lot of millionaires in the Cabinet but have any of them made their money in manufacturing, doubt it.

    Miliband is right to point this out.

    Paul Hillyard

    • The Grunt

      Right on all points, IMHO.  Brown stated as much in the debates, but Cameron blustered about it.  We could place this in the context too of Clegg’s progress around the country touting his regional investment fund.  Well, Mandelson already had this billion for such investment, which he had retrieved the HE allocation.  We’ve had an hiatus of eighteen months before this government pulled its finger out on this issue.  Even more depressing is to recollect that Clegg denied Forgemasters.  Now look at BIS’s scheme for apprentices, which, it seems, is being subverted or traduced by corporate companies.  They are apparently using the apprenticeship schemes for existing staff for training, on the profession that training is important.  Well, of course, training is vital, not least in consumer services, but that should constitute a normal and integral part of any employment, not be subsidised by a scheme designed for genuine apprenticeships.  It’s total chaos.

      • The Grunt

        ‘which he had retrieved [from] the HE allocation’ – pardon me.

  • Anonymous

    Forgemaster get it’s money from Cleggie … you have to smile…

  • Anonymous

    I’m very interested in this aspect of Ed’s speech, and use of language.

    It could be a platform for some illuminating examples of what comprises
    “predatory” behaviour; eg looking at culture of hierarchies, power structures,
    and outmoded institutions.

    The ethical aspects of current form of captialism,(and past 30 years) are very much in question-
    so great field for debate and ideas.

    Haven’t been able to read all, but would like to return later.

    Thanks, Jo.

    • Anonymous

      Interesting article in the Indy today, looking at issues more widely perhaps?

      “Cover up at St Paul’s.” (30/10.)

      • Anonymous

        Just received this and would like to add please:

        I think it relates to the letter signed by 100 economists in recent days,
        urging George O to reconsider current plan A which appears not to be working.

        Thanks, J.

  • GuyM

    If I invest in shares it’s because I hope for yearly dividend payments and the share value to rise over time in real terms. Exactly the same reason all those large pension funds invest in equities.

    Are you suggesting we all invest in companies and get little back in return? Bang goes a lot of people’s pension, savings and investments then. Not to worry though, Labour’s supporters can get public sector pension deals, which have nothing to do with market value of pension funds htat those of us in the private sector have to worry about.


LabourList Daily Email

Everything Labour. Every weekday morning

Share with your friends