Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
With unpopularity comes a certain freedom. Millwall football fans famously sing, “No one likes us; we don’t care”. Politicians rarely enjoy that much licence but at the right point in the political cycle it does offer a similar latitude.
For all his Commons majority, Keir Starmer’s government started out unloved and is working its way down. This is naturally unnerving for Labour, especially when accompanied by unforced errors such as the free suits and hospitality or harsh measures like means-testing pensioner fuel allowances. Starmer’s personal ratings, never high, have dived since July.
He has sacked his chief of staff and reorganised his Downing Street operation. MPs see that and next week’s Budget as a reset moment. Turning the page on early errors is fine, but Starmer does not need a larger relaunch.
What is required is a greater sense of urgency. The issue is not what Labour wishes to do — opponents will always criticise that — but that it is struggling to get out of second gear. Conservatives have been surprised by the emptiness of the Commons agenda — on Tuesday business began at 11.30am and ended just after 5pm — and wonder what’s happening to all the promised legislation.
Even Labour’s most electorally important mission, restoring the NHS, seems sluggish. A run of reviews, consultations and strategy documents (the last next spring) means that close to a year will have been lost before change begins. This gives credence to pre-election criticisms that Labour had no real plan beyond the soundbites.
The polling slump and political mistakes can undermine faith in the leadership. And yet Labour should take heart from history. Those new leaders who inherited a weak economy soon struggled in the polls. Margaret Thatcher’s first years were deeply troubled. David Cameron was deeply unpopular within months; his chancellor was loudly jeered at the London Paralympics. Yet both premiers were re-elected. Starmer is temperamentally suited to a long game and, on past form, need worry only if polls show his personal ratings consistently behind his Tory rival.
Labour doesn’t need to fear adverse polls early in its rule. They are a given. One of the more seasoned ministers observes: “I don’t think we will stay unpopular. I know we will.”
The other given is that first Budgets are where chancellors do their worst things. You have only one or possibly two Budgets to set a clear course. Sweeping reforms and capital investment take years to deliver any effect.
The task of chancellor Rachel Reeves is made harder by the electoral caution that ruled out 75 per cent of revenue-raising measures. While seeking tax funds from business and wealthier individuals who already pay a lot, she must also must disappoint her left flank by resisting measures that threaten the strategy of investment-led growth. She must control spending while finding more money for services and borrow more when debt hovers around 100 per cent of GDP.
But Labour’s core mandate was restoration of public services and the social fabric. Voters knew taxes would rise but Starmer’s implicit promise was that Labour would be moderate in this. So as long as she does not scare the markets or do too much to deter investment, Reeves may as well front-load the pain.
A major Budget characterised by high spending, tax and borrowing to invest — the last made possible by a redefinition of debt — is expected. She has promised one to “fix the foundations”. She would be unwise to disappoint.
Polling by the Labour think-tank the IPPR and research group Persuasion, provides a clear message. Prudent economic management is demanded but the issue on which voters will punish or reward Labour at the next election is the state of public services. As for tax, voters unsurprisingly prefer rises that appear to fall on others.
If Reeves wants the money, she needs to take the heat for extending the freeze on income tax thresholds, raising fuel duty, adding higher council tax bands, restricting inheritance tax and pensions reliefs and even increasing employer National Insurance contributions.
She must live with attacks over the tax burden and hope to pare it back later. The only political restraint should be whether her measures frighten the markets or hobble the growth agenda. Better public services and infrastructure are also a business ask. What she cannot do, whatever the economic arguments, is break the letter of her manifesto pledges on tax — though some likely measures would certainly test their spirit.
Labour needs to be similarly hard-headed on welfare and public service reforms which are bound to alienate the party’s supporters. The same boldness will be needed in the following weeks with the promised pension reform to drive more investment in UK infrastructure and venture capital.
There is no quick political win here. The party will be hammered from the right for its tax rises and from the left for not taxing and spending more. Announced investment will not move the polling dial until voters experience tangible improvements.
So Reeves can relax and trust to her course. Labour will remain unloved for some time. By-elections will be lost; hard decisions will not end; the Tory press will pound any bruises.
The rewards, if they follow, will come far nearer the next election. Labour won on a one-word manifesto promise of “change” and it has less time than it thinks. It must dispense with excessive caution of opposition. Starmer and Reeves have only one path. They may as well tread it with conviction.
