With “stable economic growth” at the heart of Labour’s manifesto, and wealth creation “the number one priority”, it would appear that Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have agreed not only to Tory fiscal rules, but also to longstanding economic myths, still parroted by the government but discredited by almost all serious economists. As your editorial (13 June) states, persuading businesses to “behave very differently from the ways it has grown used to” is going to be difficult enough, especially as the last decade has seen a propensity to seek quick profits, a reliance on cheap labour, an absence of serious investment in training and technology, and an obvious over-rewarding of bosses.
Even more difficult for Labour is persuading voters like those in East Thanet – who are “utterly ground down, mums who are doing three jobs, can’t get childcare”, to quote Polly Billington in Gaby Hinsliff’s article (Hope is not enough: people want to know that Keir Starmer can fix things, 14 June) – that the wealth created will “trickle down” to them, when, despite living in the sixth-richest economy in the world, it never has before. Manifestos often do huge damage and change voters’ intentions quickly, usually because of what they include; this one could well be detrimental because of what it doesn’t.
The real danger now is that, in their despair, too many voters could be deluded by Nigel Farage’s evil nonsense. Labour needs to concentrate on exposing him for the fraud he is in the next two weeks, and leave Rishi Sunak to his own journey of self-destruction.
Bernie Evans
Liverpool
• All parties are looking to create wealth as a means of avoiding tax increases and public spending cuts (Keir Starmer puts wealth creation at heart of Labour manifesto, 13 June). However, what they overlook is that it’s people who create the wealth – and that the maintenance of excellent health services, education, civil service support and care are the means by which the wealth creators (the UK population) can continue to participate productively in the economy.
Is it a coincidence that with our low-wage gig economy, long waiting lists, crumbling public buildings and teacher and doctor shortages, we have an underperforming economy?
The infrastructure matters, so it’s vital to pay public sector workers much better to ensure that they can afford to spend and thus improve the economy while remaining in their valuable roles. All too often this group of largely vocational employees get left behind when it comes to sharing the extra wealth created. My vote goes to the party that has the insight to value and invest in the public sector.
Yvonne Williams
Ryde, Isle of Wight
• So many options for change lost, so few promised. Labour’s “dullifesto” could have been written by ChatGPT: “write an anodyne centrist manifesto avoiding any kind of vision that might inspire emotions, positive or negative”. Real Tories out, substitute Tories in. Ho-hum.
Anthony Cheke
Oxford
• Boring? Really? I understand and agree with much of what Jonathan Freedland says about Keir Starmer’s steady-as-you-go approach (Is Keir Starmer really a ‘political robot’? If he is, he’s one that’s been programmed to win, 14 June). But I urge everyone to please read the Labour party manifesto. And then dare to tell us it is not bold.
Among other things, it includes: reform of the House of Lords; creativity restored to the school curriculum, with drama, music, art, dance and sports back where they belong to inspire children; an end to one-word Ofsted ratings; safer streets provided by neighbourhood policing; a new race equality act; more decision-making powers to mayors across the country on planning, housebuilding, transport and more; a properly instituted and monitored apprenticeship scheme; and revision of the voter ID rule.
Poetry enough for me.
Eva Tutchell
London
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
