-
I'm surprised you mentioned this as fitting the narrative gap you're talking about. To me it's a very bizarre policy indeed, and one that I suspect voters will likely reject as government being too involved in their children's lives, rather than fixing the underlying issues.
That's actually why I really like the policy. At first glance it seems like nanny state, looney left, dancing round the edges, nonsense. But then when you hear Starmer or Streeting talk about it, and you find that tooth decay is the number one reason for children to have to go to hospital - because it's so hard to get a dentists appointment before it's too late - then the benefits become obvious. It's a no brainer, just for the misery, but even i fyou're a conservative you'll understand the economic benefit to sorting kids teeth out BEFORE they have to go to hospital with all the waste that entails.
I agree that the green industrial strategy was another of those big strategic projects which tell us narratively where Labour is at. I'm sad to see it disappear/scaled back.
You are reading a single comment by @ReekBlefs and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
ReekBlefs
frankenbike
I'm surprised you mentioned this as fitting the narrative gap you're talking about. To me it's a very bizarre policy indeed, and one that I suspect voters will likely reject as government being too involved in their children's lives, rather than fixing the underlying issues. Either that, or they'll fucking love it because it's authoritarian and focused on poorer households.
That's not to say they're not trying to fix the underlying issues, but this stuff quoted in the article is way more important, and I suspect more resonant too:
It feels like the moment has changed and space for a few big interventionist policies would go down really well — not on people, but on systems. The green investment fund and single worker status were those things.