High Stakes

The local election results were challenging for Labour. They should not be read as a ringing endorsement of Reform’s policy platform. Instead, they are an expression of voters’ frustration at both the main parties. This is why both Labour and the Conservatives did poorly, only securing 35 per cent of the vote between them.

The results raise questions about Labour’s strategy. Its approach seems to be heavily influenced by the philosophy of Blue Labour, the brainchild of the academic Maurice Glasman. A key part of this strategy is to adopt socially conservative positions on cultural questions in an attempt to win the support of working class voters.

In opposition, Labour’s pledges to significantly cut net migration and tackle small boat crossings resonated with key voters who clearly have concerns around migration flows. But, with Labour in government, there is a risk that such rhetoric only brings people’s attention to an issue which has yet to be resolved. Further, even if Labour does make progress here, there is no guarantee voters who care about immigration will believe this, or will reward the government. Indeed, according to LSE researchers, voters who have concerns about migration often believe numbers are much higher than they actually are.

Chasing voters who are primarily concerned by immigration might do more harm than good. Labour’s stance on migration risks alienating other key parts of Labour’s base, including younger, university-educated, urban progressives. These voters largely do not share the same concerns about immigration, and many do not approve of the language Labour is using. My doctoral research found that 71 per cent of young people with university level qualifications believed migration to be beneficial to the UK. Research by Persuasion UK found that such individuals who have left Labour for the Greens and the Lib-Dems share this sentiment.

This doesn’t mean that Labour should ignore immigration. But they should limit themselves to highlighting concrete successes, rather than repeatedly raising the salience of a challenging issue. Currently, Labour’s stance on the issue risks highlighting the divisions that lie within its broad coalition. This partly explains why Labour lost working class groups to Reform and middle class support to the Lib-Dems and Greens in May.

There are areas that unite Labour’s coalition of working class voters and progressive middle class voters, including restoring public services and repairing the economy. Both groups favour additional investment in public services, and a more interventionist approach to the economy. However, Labour’s economic strategy, and the focus on the fiscal rules, risk constraining the government’s ability to deliver on this agenda. In opposition, this strategy was logical as Labour had to address fears voters had over the party’s economic credibility. Yet, now Labour is in government, the fiscal rules risk constraining the government’s room for manoeuvre. Whilst the markets inevitably limit how much Labour can borrow and spend, the government could arguably spend more than the current fiscal rules permit.

The restrictive fiscal rules have led to strategic problems around welfare. The cuts to winter fuel payments, which will affect some pensioners on low incomes, were unpopular and may not deliver the anticipated savings. As the economic and fiscal situation deteriorated, the government found itself again needing to save money to meet its fiscal rules, opting to cut disability support (PIP). Again, this will be deeply unpopular with those affected and may not make anticipated savings; cutting a benefit that helps some people stay in work might cause more people to leave the workforce and claim out-of-work benefits.

Moreover, cuts to welfare are not popular with Labour’s left-liberal base, who value protecting those less fortunate. Critically, this again highlights how Labour’s position is dividing its 2024 support base rather than uniting it. Interestingly, activists attending the Progressive Britain conference consistently cited welfare cuts as reasons people gave the doorstep for withdrawing support from Labour.

Overall, Labour’s strategy is not winning over working class support and it risks alienating core parts of its urban, middle class base. Labour’s strategy may have worked well in 2024, but it hasn’t benefited Labour since the election.

Labour’s best chance to beat Reform rests in its ability to unite its core working class and progressive middle class support bases. To do this, Labour has to focus on issues that unite these groups rather than double-down on matters that divide it. These voter groups want to see greater economic intervention to tackle inequality; action to address the housing crisis; and improvements in the NHS. They care about our welfare state, getting younger people back into work, protecting the environment and raising living standards. This could represent a bold and transformative policy agenda – one which unites the core voter groups Labour is targeting and address the country’s problems.

Image credit: Number 10 via Flickr