The Tories proposal for a married couples tax allowance has been widely condemned. Even some in the Conservative Party seem unhappy with it – no doubt wary of the throwback to Tory policy in the 1980s and 90s that it represents.

The abolition of the Married Couple’s Allowance, finally in 2000 and after years of campaigning, meant a victory for the view that the tax system should relate to income and economic need not ideology about the family. The Tories are simply straight-forwardly the clock back. The gesture towards the reality of the 21st century by including civil partnerships doesn’t alter in the slightest a policy that would tax people not according to income or wealth but simply as to whether they conform with Tory bias on marriage and the family.

The actual sums of money involved are pathetic – and even contrast with previous Tory promises. Now Cameron is proposing a £150 allowance. In 2001 they said the same allowance would be worth £1000. Measly or otherwise, people will get the allowance not according to their household circumstances but merely depending on whether or not they are married: people living together, and their children, who are not married, divorced people, single parents, will all be penalised because of reactionary Conservative dogma on marriage.

Ken Livingstone writes in The Guardian's Comment is Free:

"David Cameron wants us to believe that his party is progressive. Pull the other one. So much does he want this that he's told Guardian readers that it's his party, not Labour, that's radical on low pay.

There's one problem – exhibit A in his case for the prosecution is not what he claims it is. Cameron writes:

"The one progressive new idea we hear will be in Labour's manifesto – the living wage – is actually a Conservative policy: Boris Johnson has already introduced it in London. But Gordon Brown has signally failed to speak out on fair pay, whether in the public or private sector, and it falls to a radical Conservative party to take a lead."

Except that Boris Johnson didn't introduce it. The London living wage was introduced by my administration five years ago, after I gave a commitment to do so during the 2004 mayoral campaign. If Cameron wants to fight Labour by showing that he's forward-looking he will need a better example than a policy Labour introduced five years ago. With this error he actually demonstrates the exact opposite of his case – he shows that once again the Tories are way behind the curve at best, and outright fakers a lot more of the time."

Read the full article here.

The one progressive new idea we hear will be in Labour's manifesto – the living wage – is actually a Conservative policy: Boris Johnson has already introduced it in London. But Gordon Brown has signally failed to speak out on fair pay, whether in the public or private sector, and it falls to a radical Conservative party to take a lead.

In fact the Living Wage was introduced by Ken Livingstone in 2005 following a commitment in the 2004 mayoral election campaign.

If Cameron wants to argue that it is the Conservatives who lead progressive politics he would do better than to use an example of a policy introduced by a Labour mayor five years ago.

In fact Johnson is under pressure over his failure to carry through on his living wage commitments.

The Conservative threat to affordable childcare and frontline services was highlighted in London today following the news that Tory mayor Boris Johnson has disbanded London’s dedicated childcare unit.

Childcare professionals have expressed their concern about the move.

Tessa Jowell said,

“Affordable childcare is vital for thousands of London's parents.  Scrapping this unit that assists London boroughs to provide childcare threatens the work that has helped thousands of families in London and support for parents to get back into work.

"Boris Johnson's threat to childcare echoes the threat that the Conservatives pose to Sure Start Children's Centres nationally.’’

The unit, formed in 2003, was responsible for supporting London boroughs to offer better access to childcare for low-income families. It published guidance and research into the cost and quality of London childcare and piloted subsidised childcare places alongside support for parents looking for work. The agency also helped London boroughs meet their duties to ensure sufficient childcare.