Cicero Policy Briefer

Issue 25, June 2008

What’s going wrong for Labour?

By Terry Paul

Recently, it has become apparent that the manner in which a number of issues have been handled is presenting a picture of a government not quite in charge of its own destiny. The list of blunders and missteps is disturbingly long and varied:

• The ‘general election that never was’
• Inheritance tax
• Stamp duty
• Treatment of non-domiciles
• The 10p tax band
• Capital gains tax (CGT)
• Northern Rock
• Mortgage credit crunch
• English and Welsh police pay
• International company taxation

Even more worrying is that Gordon Brown, a Prime Minister famed for his previous successful tenure at HM Treasury and long preparation for the premiership, is still seemingly unable to get his government to navigate the current choppy economic waters with any degree of confidence.

Normally, dreadful events would be brushed aside by the usual government ministerial cheerleaders as either ‘third term blues’ or ‘global market forces’, but the recent local government, London mayoral and Assembly election results, together with the Conservative’s Crewe and Nantwich by-election victory, are evidence of a deep disconnect between the Brown government and the broad coalition of voters who voted Labour in for three general elections.

Make no mistake, the Crewe and Nantwich by-election was effectively a referendum on the Government’s ability to represent, in Labour parlance, “hard-working families”, the coalition of voters who have been voting Labour for the past decade—many of whom were won over for the first time in 1997. Various Labour ministers have uttered the phrase “wake-up call”, but where are the admissions of honesty and the prescriptions for change? Recent comments along the lines of “I feel your pain…” on the part of the Prime Minister may be meant to stiffen the nation’s backbone over the economy and rising food and energy prices, but they have the distinct feel of an American daytime talk show host trying desperately hard to show empathy.

Moreover, the effect of such statements could well have the effect of unfairly building up public expectations of the Government, and creating the potential for future erosion of public trust in its ability to solve problems: the UK’s economy does not function like some centralised Soviet republic, where the diktat of HQ ministers can lead to instant change on the ground. If the Government seeks to intervene at every troubled media story or headline and its ministers prove unable to coherently manage events, then it leaves the door wide open for the opposition to articulate their own narrative of change.

Part of the Government’s problem is its tendency to be buffeted by events and the lack of any compelling and credible political narrative to provide the ‘ideological glue’ to overcome the daily business of Government and withstand the onslaught of the dreaded leader writers. A recent example of this ‘narrative gap’ is the recent Government announcement of its draft legislative programme for the next parliamentary session: nothing more than a long list of 18 bills including banking reform, policing and crime reduction, equality and constitutional renewal, with no compelling political narrative to bind it all together as a remedy for the everyday concerns of the British people.

The Government’s sole attempt to develop any sort of narrative has been its much-vaunted aim to reduce child poverty—for which it has yet to meet its own self-imposed target! Let me be absolutely clear, no person wants British children to be living in poverty, but there appears to be a disconnection between the Government’s aspirations and where the British people actually want their Government to be. The Government needs to learn not only to listen hard to the British people, but also to talk back to them in their own everyday language. The last time I talked politics to colleagues, friends and close family, child poverty was not a topic of discussion. The issues discussed were the cost of living, the mortgage credit crunch, benefit claimants, knife crime, immigration and Iraq. Though not a scientific assessment of the level of discussion in homes and public houses across the nation, I think it is a fair reflection of the likely issues.

The Government’s recent woes have also been manifest in its inability to talk about anything else but ‘hard-working families’, which caused it some major discomfort over the 10p band. It needs to remember that families are composed of hard-working individuals; it was the lack of appreciation for the impact its policies would have—especially on young, single, low earners—which resulted in such a loss of credibility for the Government.

Less than a year ago, the Prime Minister was being hailed as a political saviour after being tested by an ordeal of fire, flood and pestilence (terrorism, flooding and foot and mouth)—but now we have the political pack calling for his head. So what has changed?

Gordon Brown is still the same person who ran HM Treasury with both great skill and luck, displaying impressive mastery of economic detail.

But in my view, what has changed is that he is now required to make decisions at the prime ministerial level. When Chancellor, Brown made many good decisions but always had the objective, somewhere in the policy detail, of attempting to ‘outflank’ the Tories; take the 10p tax band announcement at the very end of Brown’s 2007 budget speech, for example. These decisions were made with the benefit of a relatively good deal of time and generally deep analysis.

However, when Prime Minister, decisions must be taken quicker (look at Northern Rock), and be more rounded and considered (I refer you to recent decisions on taxation).

If this ‘mode’ of prime ministerial thought was followed then I doubt the 10p tax band decision would have been made—and perhaps Crewe might have stayed Labour, albeit with a genuine ‘mid-term blues’ reduced majority.

We only know how good we are when the proverbial chips are down. Could Gordon Brown yet pull off the biggest political challenge known in modern times? Or is he destined to go down as the Labour Party’s own Sir Anthony Eden, a recognised subject expert (Eden’s was foreign policy) waiting in the wings of a more popular leader (Churchill), but proved unable to step out of the latter’s shadow and grasp the reins of his own premiership?

Terry Paul can be contacted on +44 (0)20 7665 9533 or click here to email.