Back to the 1950s – The “Fieldian” universe

By Mark Ferguson / @markfergusonuk

Frank Field, who is (just barely) still able to call himself a Labour MP, has – for a change – talked a hateful load of old twaddle about welfare and benefits. As the Guardian reported this morning, Field said :

“For a large section of what used to be the core of the Labour vote – working class women – what they say they most want is a husband or partner in work which allows them their private domain of the family in which they can not only nurture but take on work when they think it is right, for their children, to do so.”

Field also rails against the “feminisation” of the debate about poverty. Obviously Field, who seems to inhabit a universe where the Tories are lovely cuddly bunnies who, rather than slashing at the state and removing the safety net for millions of poor families, are delightful – the sort of people with whom you can do business.

The precise location of this alternative “Fieldian” universe seems to be the 1950s – a time where many women were happy to be childbearing housewives, and many men wished to provide for their families. But this isn’t the 1950s. We’ve come a long way since then.

Field also decided now, when he is trusted by so few within the party, is the perfect to time to launch into one of his oft repeated diatribes against Labour’s record on public spending:

“A central, if not the central idea now of what the Labour Party stands for, which is high public expenditure, is not only being surmounted by opposing forces – but they are letting the ball and chain rain down on their heads as a result”

Field has long been against the fiscal policies of the last government – opposing a stimulus and then urging the government to “cut, and cut quickly” – surely making him the only true advocate of Osbornomics in the PLP.

If Frank Field isn’t for high state spending, if he isn’t for a modern view on the role of women – what is Frank Field in Labour for? Once upon a time Frank was brought into the cabinet to “think the unthinkable”. Perhaps now he should do that again, and make the very small leap across to the government benches where he so seems to belong.