Labour is wise to target the Mumsnet vote

Attack ad highlights Tory plans to cut tax credits.

Unable to match the Conservatives' billboard blitz, Labour has taken to Mumsnet in an effort to woo female voters away from David Cameron. The attack ad (see screen grabs, below) targets Tory plans to scale back child tax credits and warns mothers that they'll "get less than they bargained for" if they vote Conservative.

George Osborne promised in his party conference speech to save £400m by scrapping "tax credits to families with incomes over £50,000". But the Institute for Fiscal Studies last week calculated that such a cut would save only £45m. For Osborne to save £400m, the IFS worked out, he would need to lower the threshold to £31,000, not £50,000.

Mumsnet 1

Labour's decision to target female voters through the campaign is a canny move. It was the defection of women from the Tories that handed power to Labour in 1997, and that secured the party's re-election in 2001 and 2005.

Mumsnet 2

At the last election, 38 per cent of women voted for Labour, compared to 34 per cent of men. Without female voters, Labour's majority in 2005 would have been 23 seats, rather than the 66 it actually won. Women are one of the key groups yet to be won over by Cameron: a recent ComRes poll gave Labour a 4-point lead among female voters.

Mumsnet 3

As the economy begins to recover, the Tories' plan to curb middle-class welfare could well turn out to be a vote loser. Expect Labour to use this line of attack repeatedly in the election campaign.

Mumsnet 4


Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

PMQs review: Theresa May shows again that Brexit means hard Brexit

The Prime Minister's promise of "an end to free movement" is incompatible with single market membership. 

Theresa May, it is commonly said, has told us nothing about Brexit. At today's PMQs, Jeremy Corbyn ran with this line, demanding that May offer "some clarity". In response, as she has before, May stated what has become her defining aim: "an end to free movement". This vow makes a "hard Brexit" (or "chaotic Brexit" as Corbyn called it) all but inevitable. The EU regards the "four freedoms" (goods, capital, services and people) as indivisible and will not grant the UK an exemption. The risk of empowering eurosceptics elsewhere is too great. Only at the cost of leaving the single market will the UK regain control of immigration.

May sought to open up a dividing line by declaring that "the Labour Party wants to continue with free movement" (it has refused to rule out its continuation). "I want to deliver on the will of the British people, he is trying to frustrate the British people," she said. The problem is determining what the people's will is. Though polls show voters want control of free movement, they also show they want to maintain single market membership. It is not only Boris Johnson who is pro-having cake and pro-eating it. 

Corbyn later revealed that he had been "consulting the great philosophers" as to the meaning of Brexit (a possible explanation for the non-mention of Heathrow, Zac Goldsmith's resignation and May's Goldman Sachs speech). "All I can come up with is Baldrick, who says our cunning plan is to have no plan," he quipped. Without missing a beat, May replied: "I'm interested that [he] chose Baldrick, of course the actor playing Baldrick was a member of the Labour Party, as I recall." (Tony Robinson, a Corbyn critic ("crap leader"), later tweeted that he still is one). "We're going to deliver the best possible deal in goods and services and we're going to deliver an end to free movement," May continued. The problem for her is that the latter aim means that the "best possible deal" may be a long way from the best. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.