{"id":15874,"date":"2024-01-17T12:24:16","date_gmt":"2024-01-17T12:24:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/?p=15874"},"modified":"2024-02-02T11:14:36","modified_gmt":"2024-02-02T11:14:36","slug":"starmer-cant-afford-to-be-cautious","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/2024\/01\/starmer-cant-afford-to-be-cautious\/","title":{"rendered":"Starmer can\u2019t afford to be cautious"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Two fears should haunt Labour this coming year and how it responds will determine the size of its majority and its ability to govern effectively.<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

Labour fears another defeat and this inclines it to be ultra-cautious.\u00a0 It should also fear having to govern an economy and society in need of bold action.\u00a0 Managing the competing demands of caution and boldness will be a major theme this election year.<\/p>\n

There are some parallels with 1997 though this can be overdone.\u00a0 After losing four elections in a row, Labour\u2019s leadership \u00a0took no risks in 1997.\u00a0 Internal battles with Militant<\/a> were weaponised by opponents to suggest that Labour was susceptible to take-over by \u2018extremists\u2019.\u00a0 In 1992, Tory attacks on Labour\u2019s \u2018double whammy\u2019 \u2013 claiming a Labour Government would lead to more taxes and higher prices \u2013 had damaged Labour\u2019s campaign.\u00a0 Labour\u2019s leadership was determined to eradicate \u00a0its reputation as a \u2018tax-and-spend\u2019 party five years later.<\/p>\n

The economy and state of public finances are in a far less healthy state today than in 1997 when Labour last came to power.\u00a0 Additionally, economic growth needs to be accompanied by measures to address environmental challenges as never before.\u00a0 Labour\u2019s \u00a328bn Green Investment Plan exemplifies the challenge.\u00a0 The Tories portray the plan as evidence of Labour\u2019s fiscal incontinence but the reality for all parties is that the pain and costs will only increase the longer action is postponed.<\/p>\n

This dilemma may partly explain why there is less excitement in the political air compared with 1997.\u00a0 \u2018Things can only get better\u2019<\/a> resonated with the public.\u00a0 Expectations today are more sober, even sombre, reflecting the scale of the challenges and a more jaded electorate fed up with spin, broken promises and scandals such as over the Post Office and Horizon.<\/p>\n

The Tories\u2019 damaged reputation was key to the 1997 election result.\u00a0 A combination of \u2018sleaze\u2019 and economic mismanagement damaged the Tory brand.\u00a0 Sleaze was a very loose catch-all covering everything from \u2018cash for questions\u2019 to prurient reports on the private lives of Tory MPs.\u00a0 The Tories might have weathered the sleaze storm but the loss of faith in Tory economic competence was too much. Black Wednesday \u2013 16 September 1992 \u2013 when the Treasury was forced to pull the UK out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism was pivotal.\u00a0 Despite an economic recovery over the following years of the Parliament, the Tories failed to regain their reputation for competence.\u00a0 Over the course of this Parliament, that reputation for economic management has taken a similar hammering.\u00a0 This will be key to the election\u2019s outcome.<\/p>\n

Fiscal flexibility finally<\/h2>\n

The 1997 Labour Government inherited a buoyant economy.\u00a0 But Labour had committed itself to matching tough Tory spending plans for the first two years.\u00a0 Designed to signal fiscal competence and challenge notions of \u2018tax-and-spend\u2019, Labour\u2019s manifesto nonetheless included important spending commitments.\u00a0 Tony Blair prioritised \u2018education, education, education\u2019, with a commitment made to raise the proportion of national income going to \u00a0education over five years as well as increasing spending on patient health in the NHS.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Alistair Darling had the task of managing the public finances as Chief Secretary to the Treasury in the 1997 Labour Government.\u00a0 Keeping within the adopted spending limits meant reprioritising existing commitments.\u00a0 In a Commons statement<\/a> a month after the election, Darling confirmed that nursery vouchers would be scrapped and the money used to provide nursery places for all four-year-olds.\u00a0 The assisted places scheme would be abolished to allow for the reduction in class sizes for 5-7 year olds.\u00a0 To avoid the opprobrium of removing benefits of one kind, Labour introduced alternative, more progressive benefits.<\/p>\n

After two years, the constraints were lifted.\u00a0 Public expenditure soared as never before outside wartime.\u00a0 And the priorities attached to health and education spending worked to the great advantage of the new devolved bodies as these increases were filtered through to the Scottish Parliament through the Barnett formula<\/a>, a mechanism that has consistently proved generous to Scotland.\u00a0 In 2024, Labour needs to be careful not to tie its hands in office by the manner in which it portrays itself as fiscally responsible in the run-up to the election.\u00a0 Working within tight budgetary constraints will limit what it can do if only in the early years.<\/p>\n

Nobody knows for sure what the outcome of the election will be though all the indications are that Labour will win \u2013 even the SNP has gone from arguing that Labour can\u2019t win in England to arguing that Labour can\u2019t lose.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Labour\u2019s nervousness is for all that understandable.\u00a0 It is caught between the public policy need for bolder action and an even more sober presentational approach than that of 1997.\u00a0 Bold policies are not incompatible with sober campaigning.\u00a0 But sober campaigning may not excite and mobilise support.<\/p>\n

The Scottish dimension<\/h2>\n

The SNP will pounce on any hint that Labour favours English seats as evidence that it will neglect Scotland in the run-up to the next Holyrood elections due in 2026.\u00a0 Labour needs a strong Scottish message.\u00a0 In 1997 that was provided by the commitment to devolution.\u00a0 Labour could then portray itself as Scotland\u2019s national party without being a Scottish nationalist party.\u00a0 Devolution was designed to allow for diversity within the UK and Scottish Labour should not be afraid to be different.\u00a0 Scottish Labour offered distinctly Scottish policies well before devolution and Scottish Labour leaders were never frightened to stand up for Scotland.<\/p>\n

The SNP \u2018stole\u2019 Labour\u2019s political clothes some years back.\u00a0 Scottish Labour needs to reclaim them.\u00a0 It needs to demonstrate that it is open to further devolution if there are good reasons for doing so without falling into the trap of committing to more devolution as an end in itself.\u00a0 It also needs to show it will be more relaxed in relations with the Scottish Government \u2013 if the SNP wants to pick a fight then so be it but London should avoid being portrayed as the Tories have.<\/p>\n

A Labour landslide is possible but that is not always good news.\u00a0 Landslides can create tensions within a parliamentary group as more diverse views and interests need to be managed.\u00a0 Francis Pym was famously rebuked by Margaret Thatcher during the 1983 election after suggesting that landslides \u2018don\u2019t on the whole produce successful governments\u2019.\u00a0 As a former Tory Chief Whip he was aware of the party management challenges following a landslide but party leaders tend to measure success by the size of their majority.<\/p>\n

This has been a problem during this parliament for the Tories just as it has been for the SNP in Holyrood.\u00a0 The interests articulated by Tory MPs returned in the \u2018red wall seats\u2019 have been in conflict with the ones of those representing many traditional \u2018home counties\u2019 seats.\u00a0 The independence referendum provided unity of purpose despite the diverse views of members in the SNP group following the party\u2019s 2011 overall majority.\u00a0 Divisions have been exposed as the prospect of another independence referendum has receded.<\/p>\n

The SNP will argue that Labour will need to prioritise English seats and a strong SNP contingent in the next Parliament is necessary to make sure Scotland\u2019s interests are not neglected.\u00a0 But the SNP argument that Scottish Labour MPs will be lobby fodder is weak.\u00a0 Scottish Labour MPs will supply at least some members of the government.\u00a0 The existence of a body of Scottish Labour MPs elected in 1997, not least the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Chief Secretary, ensured that Scottish interests were not neglected.<\/p>\n

The existing two Scottish Labour MPs clearly do not have the collective clout of the Scottish Labour contingent returned in 1997 including members of Blair\u2019s first Cabinet – Gordon Brown, Robin Cook, Alistair Darling, George Robertson, Donald Dewar.\u00a0 But Scottish Labour can turn this to its advantage.\u00a0 While the SNP claims that its MPs will stand up for Scotland, Labour will have Scots at the heart of government.\u00a0 The choice for voters may come down to choosing MPs shouting from the opposition benches or MPs being part of the core executive.<\/p>\n

So far, Labour has tilted heavily towards caution. That might take Keir Starmer into Downing Street, perhaps by a landslide.\u00a0 But a more emboldened Labour government will be needed if he wants to secure a second term and assist Anas Sarwar to take up residence in Bute House.\u00a0 The SNP looks as if it is already on its way out of office but much can happen between now and the 2026 Holyrood elections.\u00a0 Starmer cannot afford to be cautious.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Labour “is caught between the public policy need for bolder action and an even more sober presentational approach than that of 1997.\u00a0 Bold policies are not incompatible with sober campaigning.\u00a0 But sober campaigning may not excite and mobilise support,\u201d says Prof Mitchell, arguing the case against ultra-caution.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":101,"featured_media":15763,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[319],"tags":[710,36,341,480],"class_list":["post-15874","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-economy","tag-labour-party","tag-scottish-government","tag-scottish-labour","tag-uk-government"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15874","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/101"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15874"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15874\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15763"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15874"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15874"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15874"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}