You cannot decouple wealth creation from wealth distribution.

A Labour leader embracing the benefits of Growth is all very well. But you cannot decouple wealth creation from wealth distribution. Obviously a growing economy is better than a stagnant one. But the product of growth generated mainly in the private sector can only be redistributed via corporate and personal taxation.

Growth is measured in “Gross Domestic Product “ (GDP). Key word here is “Product” , this includes tangibles (manufactured goods) and intangibles (services, especially financial services).

In a mixed economy the private sector is the primary driver of growth – they, in classic terms, use the factors of production (Land, Labour, Capital and Enterprise) to make goods and services.

But along with these goods and services the economy needs public services most of which are, or should be, provided under the control of national and local government. We have seen that “control” absent or ineffective in recent decades. Look no further than the Water sector to see overwhelming evidence of this. Water and other private sector monopolies have, scandalously, been run with shareholders and board directors as the primary beneficiaries not the public.

Healthcare is a key “public service” – the benefits of having a healthy population go beyond moral ones. The economy will grow better and be more productive is people are healthy. How often do we forget or even fail to measure these pragmatic benefits of the NHS?

Certain public services like public transportation are, and mostly should be, paid for by users. But again proper Cost/Benefit Analysis would show that some public subvention is beneficial and justified.

There is no “Magic Money Tree” in that rather hackneyed phrase. Investment in infrastructure and employment in the essential public services sector has to be paid for either by taxation or borrowings, or by instituting payment in relation to use. Road pricing can generate income from motorists but is unpopular (eg ULEZ). Charging for some healthcare is also unpopular and extending that is unlikely to be politically viable.

No potential government can truthfully rule out increased taxation if public services are to be maintained or improved. What Labour should be doing is arguing for a shift from regressive to progressive taxation. It’s not Marxist to argue that a wealthy modern state should follow the “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” principle . That means taxing , mainly, wealth and income not consumption.