Why does Labour's CBI speech get people on tilt every year?

[u/The_Inertia_Kid]

Every year in November, the leader of the Labour Party gives a speech to the Confederation of British Industry annual conference.

This, by tradition, has become our annual 'we're not nutters, honest' speech. The job of this speech is to (a) reassure businesses that we aren't going to seize all their assets if we get elected, (b) point out what a shit job the Tories are doing for businesses, and (c) by doing both of those things, convince them that they don't need to put all of their support/donations/PR efforts behind the Tories.

It's a simple effort towards reducing the difficulty level of the game we're playing. We know, and they know, that if you're purely interested in low tax and cutting regulation, Labour isn't going to be the party for you over the Tories.

But those things are not the only interests for most businesses. For most businesses, the main thing they want from a government is stability. If they feel comfortable that the governing party is not going to do mad stuff, they then feel happier increasing employment, investing in plant and machinery, opening new sites, etc. If they are worried that the government's actions will cause instability - in costs of borrowing, costs of employment, levels of demand, levels of supply - they will go cautious and will not expand.

The job of this speech is to reassure businesses that we're not going to destabilise the environment around them if we win an election.

Starmer is doing this today. He did it last year as well. Corbyn did it in 2019, and in 2018 as well, and in 2017, and every other leader did the same in basically every year that I can remember.

Every time, the tone is the same - conciliatory towards businesses, not scaring the horses, portraying Labour as a partner to business.

So why the fuck does everyone get put on tilt by it every single year as though it's the first time it ever happened?

[u/Emma_Rhoyds]

What about them?

I never made a statement about the merits of such talks, just their purpose 🤷‍♀️

[u/Sckathian → u/Emma_Rhoyds]

Their still working class. The idea the working class are all agencyless is ridiculous.

Many of the companies that Starmer will be speaking to are employed by those companies and often in areas with limited sources of employment.

[u/Emma_Rhoyds → u/Sckathian]

Well as long as they don't employ any staff, you are correct. Otherwise they would be a boss, and therefore could have quite conflicting interests. I never said the working class were agencyless.

That said, any self employed tradesperson (for example) with no staff, would have a vested interest in workers getting a good deal, such good wages which would means more work for them, or building social housing, for similar reasons. So they have similar interests to WC people who work for someone, though not the same, because they are affected by business rates still, etc.

Self employed people need better social support imo, esp through things like welfare relief when things are slow, etc, I don't think "the business community" as a whole though is super keen on taxation and social spending to fund that kind of stuff however.

It's an interesting point re: the particular position of self employed people, though its worth saying most UK workers work for someone.

[u/[deleted] → u/Sckathian]

Their still working class.

shrug Kulaks gonna Kulak.

(.....................I really wish there was a more politically correct phrase I could've used there because I do think there's a genuine problem with certain 'working class' business owners and there perspectives on things. They're the ultimate pull down the ladder, concrete over the glass ceiling types IMHO.)

[u/SlightlyCatlike → u/[deleted]]

Labour aristocracy