Will Sir Keir Starmer be the UK’s Joe Biden? Part 1

Investment in the UK

The Institute for Public Policy Research has found that ”the UK has had the lowest level of investment in the G7 for 24 of the last 30 years. The last time the UK was ‘average’ in the G7 for total investment was in 1990. If the UK had maintained an average position over the last three decades, there would have been an additional £1.9 trillion worth of investment into the country”.

The 30 years includes both Labour, Conservative and the Conservative/LibDem coalition Governments. The businessman and economist, Mohamed El-Erian, describes this cumulative shortfall in investment as ‘staggering’. Whatever extravagant adjective is used to describe this figure it is nevertheless difficult for most people to comprehend.

The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has recognised the need for investment in order to achieve growth in the UK economy. However, it is hardly possible that such a shortfall can be corrected in five years, in time for the next election, without radical changes being made, since the failure to invest has had profound consequences for both businesses and public services.

The Party of change

In the run-up to the last election the Labour Party claimed to be the party of change. Labour have introduced some progressive reforms in their first months in government. For example, VAT has been put on private school fees and contrary to Jeremy Hunt’s prediction that 90,000 children could flood the state sector there has been no exodus to the state schools. An inheritance tax loophole for farmers has been closed. Labour’s employment rights bill will improve workers’ rights.

However, they have also maintained the two-child benefit cap and introduced means-tested winter fuel payments for pensioners, both of which have received adverse publicity. The Government has described the latter as a tough choice, although as the suspended Labour MP Zarah Sultana points out the tough choice is that faced by the pensioners who can no longer afford to heat their homes.

Growth or redistribution of wealth – or both!

A 2% wealth tax on assets over £10 million would raise £24 billion, enough to fund winter fuel payments, scrap the two-child benefit cap and support public sector workers whose wages have stagnated for over a decade. Removing the two-child benefit cap is seen to be the most cost-effective way of reducing child poverty, lifting 300,000 children above the breadline and 700,000 more out of extreme poverty.

This brings into question Labour’s commitment to change and anyone with doubts will surely have had them confirmed by Rachel Reeves’ Spring Statement. Even before the statement many of those who live in poverty or use food banks had reason to question whether austerity has ended under this Government, indeed may even be confused and surprised by the promise that there will be no return to austerity.

In the statement Reeves has made it clear where the Government stands with regard to the redistribution of wealth and inequality. Shockingly it is disabled people who have been targeted. Analysis carried out by The Trussell Trust using data from the UK Government shows that already there are three million disabled people facing hunger, skipping or cutting back on meals because they can’t afford essentials.

Information published with the Spring Statement shows that by 2029/2030 spending on Universal Credit support for disabled people will be cut by over £3 billion, affecting 3 million people. Spending on Personal Independence Payments (PIPs) will be cut by £4.7 billion affecting 800,000 people. 96% of households affected include someone who is disabled – the weakest members of our society with the smallest voice will be made to pay for the mistakes of previous Governments and for the refusal of the present Government to alter course!.

Failing to learn from past mistakes – economic policies

Unquestionably, it is what the Government does rather than what it says which determines its true nature and how it will be judged by voters. Of most concern is that with a disturbing lack of vision the Government is continuing with the same policies that led to ‘broken Britain’ – austerity and an unhealthy fixation on growth as the sole means of solving Britain’s problems, only one step removed from the discredited ‘trickle-down economics’ that in practice leads to increasing inequality.

Labour has the Parliamentary majority that would allow it to make more radical changes such as a wealth tax, and remove many from poverty today, rather than in a few years’ time, when growth may – or may not – be sufficient to fund improved public services.

Failing to learn from past mistakes – how to tackle the far-right

If you want to understand how not to deal with the far-right look at today’s Conservative Party. By repeatedly trying to undermine the far-right by moving to the political right, eliminating more centralist voices from within the party, it is left as a hollow shell that is continuing to implode.

And how is Labour tackling the problem of Nigel Farage and Reform UK who threaten 89 Labour held seats? By trying to undermine them using the same language and threatening similar policies to those of Reform UK. As the Conservatives have shown you can never move far enough right to undermine Reform UK without destroying your own party.

Who do you vote for – policies or personalities?

Jonathan Freedland pointed out that instead of voting for a set of policies there is a tendency for the electorate to vote for the politician who they see as most closely representing those policies. Clearly this tendency is greatly amplified if the politician is perceived as being a ‘character’.

This provides a double difficulty for Starmer. He is certainly not noted for his charisma. He is seen more an administrator than a politician, reacting to events rather than leading. There are particular problems which he will address and try to solve within the limits of what is possible. He is after all having to work with a largely inexperienced team of Labour ministers and with the sheer volume of problems that swamp an incoming Government.

But if Freedland’s premise is correct how does the voter know what policies they are backing by voting for Starmer? Labour’s reticence about detailing their policies before the general election served them well, but now their failure clearly to communicate what they stand for will be detrimental in future elections. This difficulty has been made worse by the confusion and uncertainty created by their U-turns.

At the next election, they will be blamed for shortcomings, even if these are due to many years of bad management before Labour came to power.  And to be sure, if Labour do not communicate a convincing vision for the future, Reform UK will be pleased to fill the political vacuum.

Can we avoid a Reform UK Government? Part 2 of ‘Will Sir Keir Starmer be the UK’s Joe Biden?’ considers this question – click here to read it.

We want to hear your views. Please send any comments to editor@westenglandbylines.co.uk.

We are registered with easyfundraising! 8,000 brands will donate to us for free every time you use it.

It’s super quick and easy to SIGN UP, and will never cost you anything whatsoever. It’s FREE for you and HUGE for us!