A midterm review suggests the government is doing its best to lose the next election, but is Labour doing enough to win it?
On 6 May 2010 the people of the United Kingdom went to the polls. 10.7 million people voted Conservative, 8.7 million voted Labour and 6.8 million voted Liberal Democrat. Crucially, despite their sizeable lead in votes, the Conservatives underperformed and failed to achieve the 326 seats that they needed to form a majority government. They were, however, the largest party.
After a feverish few days of horse-trading, David Cameron was asked by the Queen to form a government. A short time later the Liberal Democrat parliamentary party and its federal executive approved the coalition agreement and Britain’s first coalition government resulting directly from the outcome of an election was formed. Now, some 30 months later, we are just over halfway through the parliament. So how has it gone?
The first thing to say is that we are probably not where we thought we would be. It is hard to remember now, but if you can, think back. The early months of the coalition were heady days for Cameron and Nick Clegg, both of whom were still enormously popular. Harriet Harman did a pretty good job as acting leader but it was what it was – a holding position. Cameron made hay and used the vacuum afforded by the ridiculously long Labour leadership campaign to set the tone of the economic debate. Lest the voters be in any doubt, the government told them: Labour had brought about near economic Armageddon and irresponsibly allowed the deficit to get out of control. The government would therefore have to take tough decisions in order to avoid Britain becoming Greece. The coalition was portrayed as being two parties putting aside their differences in the national interest. It was selfless and not self-interested – a national crusade of economic responsibility pledged to cutting the deficit. The leadership vacuum in Labour meant that this largely went unchallenged. And then Labour elected ‘Red’ Ed Miliband and the Tories could not believe their luck. And that was how it went for the first 18 months or so.
But, slowly at first, it started to go wrong for Cameron. Mistakes became more frequent; forests, tuition fees, Andy Coulson and Rupert Murdoch. People started muttering about incompetence. Miliband began to improve as leader of the opposition, had some good run-outs at prime minister’s question time, and with issues like the riots and phonehacking he did very well. But the polls still favoured the Tories over Labour even if the gap was narrowing.
And then began a truly terrible eight months for the government that involved a catastrophically bad budget and a series of crises and resignations. The economy double-dipped, the deficit was reducing more slowly than had been hoped. Europe reared its head on the backbenches, there was a funding scandal and ‘plebgate’. Quite simply, the government has done its best to establish a reputation of incompetence. Meanwhile, Labour has established a double-digit poll lead over the Tories and closed the economic credibility gap with voters. The Liberal Democrats are polling in single figures, neck-and-neck with the United Kingdom Independence party, with Clegg being seen as seriously damaged goods.
All in all an incredible turn-around in a mere two years that has left the government desperately hoping that the recent signs of economic recovery are not a false dawn.
But it would be a mistake if we confused the collapse in support for the Tories and Liberal Democrats with Labour popularity. The real story is that no party is inspiring the electorate and that voters increasingly see their choice as one of least-worst options.
First, the coalition has no coherent story to tell other than that it has a single shared organising thought – ‘plan A’ deficit reduction. It means that it dare not adjust its plans despite clear evidence that it actually should, because to do so risks pretty much the only thing that the two sides have left in common. But deficit reduction is not a vision for the future of the country, it is a policy; and, as they get buffeted from all sides, this lack of a sense of where the coalition parties want to take the country is telling. They have no compass to guide them through; no overarching passion or inspiration; and the voters can see that. The best asset of the coalition, though, is still Cameron. He is by far and away the most trusted of all the party leaders despite the government’s travails. Voters see him as strong and prime ministerial.
Second, Labour does have the beginnings of a vision, a story. It is of ‘One Nation’ Labour prepared to challenge vested interests on behalf of the ‘squeezed middle’. Banks and utility companies will be challenged, living wages rolled out and welfare linked to contribution. But there is still an economic problem for Labour. While it is certainly trusted more on the economy, on its ability to reduce the deficit it is not. And this is not surprising; it may occasionally say the words ‘tough’ and ‘choices’ in the same sentence but the overall impression is still that Labour opposes cuts and thinks that it can reduce the deficit painlessly by achieving growth and taxing banks. The approach seems to be one of keeping quiet and letting the Tories lose the election. It may be clever politics in the short term but the inherent duplicity is surely at odds with the One Nation aspiration, never mind that it is simply wrong-headed. And Miliband, while undoubtedly improving rapidly in the minds of the electorate and being seen as on their side, is still not seen as a potential prime minister. And that is despite Labour probably being favourite to emerge from the 2015 election as the largest party.
But there is still half a parliament to go, and remember how much has changed in just the first half. In reality, before polling day UKIP will probably lose some support, the Liberal Democrats will probably gain some, and on that basis it is still likely to be a pretty close election. So interesting times – and almost anything can happen.
—————————————————————————————
Peter Watt is a contributing editor to Progress and a former general secretary of the Labour party
—————————————————————————————