There is a new buzz-phrase in British politics. Whether it’s a description of the mood of disillusioned electors willing to gamble on voting for a non-mainstream party, or, in the context of Labour’s political strategy (and the case for Keir Starmer) taking more calculated risks, it’s all about rolling the dice.
When it comes to the former, the public is evidently angry with mainstream politics. Living standards have been stagnant for the best part of two decades, taxes are high and public services are under strain. The Tories were a shambles – the Brexit impasse, partygate, the mini-Budget, four prime ministers in five years – but, a year on from Labour’s landslide victory, impatient voters are quick to ask if anything much has changed for the better.
If the Conservatives remain unforgiven and Labour appears not to be up to the task, the public, who no longer have strong party allegiances, will look elsewhere. The biggest fear for the mainstream parties is that voters in their millions decide to take a punt on Reform. They might have only had five MPs elected at the last general election (and two no longer receive the whip), but the message from doorsteps and focus groups is that Reform is being considered a serious option by many voters who believe they have nothing to lose.
The “nothing-to-lose” sentiment can be powerful. It almost took Scotland out of the UK in 2014, succeeded in taking the UK out of the EU in a referendum two years later and contributed to Jeremy Corbyn’s strong performance in 2017. Politics has been susceptible to shocks since the global financial crisis. Opinion polls suggest we are heading for another – and that’s before voters come to terms with a further big tax increase, the announcement of which in an autumn budget now looks inevitable. Reform’s lead is only likely to grow as a result.
Working out how to respond to the public mood involves breaking that mood down to its constituent parts. First, the state of the country is bad. Second, mainstream parties seem to be incapable of rectifying this. Third, matters are so bad that it is hard to see how a radical change of direction could make matters worse, and they might just make them better.
On the state of the country, the government could seek to challenge the current negativity, but would be wise not to. To the extent that US President Joe Biden was able to convey a clear message before abandoning his re-election campaign, it was to tell the American people that they were wrong to feel so downbeat about the state of the economy. On the facts, he had a point, but as an electoral strategy it did not work.
The more important issue is whether the government can convince the public it is capable of turning the country around and, in particular, deliver economic growth. This is in part about narrative – a clear explanation of how it intends to get the country to a better place – and in part about implementing policies that will contribute to achieving this objective. The government has to both tell and show.
It is in this context that talk of how Starmer himself has to roll the dice and take risks is proliferating. The wisdom of this advice depends upon which risks one has in mind. The precarious nature of the public finances and the nervousness of the bond markets – as exposed by the reaction to Rachel Reeves’ tears at Prime Minister’s Questions – mean that fiscal caution is essential. Last week’s events also mean that the risk of parliamentary rebellions and defeats has increased. This leaves Starmer with little room for manoeuvre, having to operate in the space between what is fiscally responsible and what is acceptable to his backbenchers. Nonetheless, when it comes to taking political risks to deliver economic growth, he has got to try.
Then there is the third aspect of the public mood, that there is nothing to lose. However bad matters might be now, this is not true. We only have to go back to autumn 2022 to know what happens when a blasé attitude to unfunded tax cuts is put into operation (Nigel Farage, of course, was an enthusiast for the Truss/Kwarteng mini-Budget). Reform’s economic agenda is just one big fiscal risk that could be devastating to mortgage holders and small businesses.
For all his considerable political skills, Farage shows no sign of being able to articulate a coherent policy platform. Nor is there any prospect of Reform being able to put forward a team of credible ministers who would have the first idea of how to solve a complex problem.
As for the idea that Farage represents “clean hands” and is uncontaminated by the policy failures of the past, he was instrumental in the biggest policy decision this country has taken in the last decade, and even he does not think that Brexit has gone well. It might be worth reminding the public of that.
For the moment, a good proportion of the public is not listening to these arguments. Labour’s challenge is convincing these voters that a gamble on Reform will come at a cost by the time we get to the next election; that they have something to lose and nothing to gain; to make voters more risk-averse. In short, the next election is going to have to be seen as being much more important than a game of dice.
[See also: Starmerism is disintegrating]
Content from our partners
Related
