More or ULEZ a Good Night

Just over a week ago Rishi Sunak narrowly avoided being the first prime minister since Harold Wilson to suffer three by-election defeats on the same day, so why is it that Labour are on the back foot? It explains a fair bit of British political history that Labour can manage that; a party that can never quite believe it’s on its way to power. Even back in 1996 on the cusp of a landslide Tony Blair would spend sleepless nights fearing a Conservative comeback.

On the face of it, it was a terrible night for the Conservatives. Firstly, in Selby and Ainsty, there was a 24% swing from the Conservatives to Labour, which is the second-highest swing to the main opposition in any government seat since 1945, with only the 1994 landslide in Dudley West (29.1%) being larger. Secondly, in Somerton and Frome the swing was even this larger – 29% – this time towards the Liberal Democrats in an area they will be pumping General Election resources into. The third contest of the day, Uxbridge and South Ruislip, somewhat surprisingly was held by the Conservatives, although the majority was down to just 495 votes, with a swing of just under 7% to Labour.

The latter of those contests has led to criticism of Labour, their leader Keir Starmer, and also the combination of Sadiq Khan and the expansion of ULEZ across the capital. Uxbridge has always been a tough seat for Labour and wasn’t even held by them in the Tony Blair landslide years. It’s a seat with tough demographics for the party – Brexit voting, older, homeowners. It’s worth noting that even if the Uxbridge swing were replicated across the country, it would make Labour the largest party and the Tories would lose more seats than Brown did in 2010. If a swing like Selby’s was replicated, the Tories would be in wipeout territory.

A Step Towards Number 10

It’s fair to say after a triumphant 2022 seeing the back of two Conservative Prime Ministers in Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, 2023 has been a more taxing year for Keir. Rishi Sunak and his brand of relative competency have meant that Labour’s poll leads have slowly reduced – albeit still a comfortable lead – and he has had to deal with backlash to both his party’s recent Twitter attack ads and the hiring of Sue Gray. Both felt like avoidable own goals, so heading into Thursday’s local elections it was imperative that the results showed Labour progress.

Luckily, for Starmer, Thursday was the perfect reboot for Labour. They gained 536 councillors and 22 councils propelling them to become the largest party of councillors for the first time since 2002. The Tories lost over 1000 seats, exceeding the figure that was highlighted to be a ‘worst case scenario’ by their own party just last week. They lost over half the councils they were defending, in all areas of the country. The Liberal Democrats and Green Party also had exceptional nights, gaining 408 and 241 councillors respectively.

All signs point towards success for Keir and Labour heading into next year’s election – however, Sky News decided to throw out a General Election projection based on that day’s vote. The headlines wrote themselves; despite the gains, Labour would be short of a majority and relying on the Liberal Democrats, or only able to form a minority government next year. I get why they made the projection, but for me, it’s a shoddy attempt at headline-chasing.

Firstly, not all of the country even voted. Two main regions that did not vote are Scotland and London, two areas of big Labour support, especially with their resurgence against the SNP. Secondly, there is much more tactical voting in local elections than there is in general elections. In the locals, on Thursday 40% of the vote went to the Liberal Democrats, Greens, and Independents. In a general election that does not happen; they maybe hit 25% max.

A Year of Keir

Just over a year ago Keir Starmer was elected the new leader of the Labour Party, taking 56% of the vote, a landslide. It’s fair to say that Starmer’s first year in the role has been unprecedented. Usually, a party leadership victory would ensure front-page headlines, interview spreads, and immense exposure across the various news channel. However, the extraordinary times we were in meant that the leader sat on the backfoot as the country sat in the grip of a pandemic. Where most opposition leaders could stamp their vision, Keir Starmer did not have the opportunity.

This is especially unhelpful when you consider the state of the party he inherited from his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn. When Starmer became leader last year Labour was roughly 20-25% behind in the polls. His task was an immense one. Slowly but surely however, the Labour leader found his voice, his own vision, and both he and the party began to eat into the lead.

Simply by not being Jeremy, and by coming across as clearly competent, able to lead and so on, he made great strides in the general standing of the party in the country. Add in his performances within PMQ’s, and the governments shoddy handling of the pandemic, and the early period was a success. Starmer was able to put in place a brand-new general secretary of his choice and built a majority on the party’s NEC. The Labour leader also able to show his ruthless side by sacking Rebecca Long Bailey after she failed to conform with his demands following her support of an anti-Semitic quote, and took the whip away from the former leader, Jeremy Corbyn.  

By the end of 2020, the average Conservative poll lead had dropped from 20-25% to just a couple of points, Starmer was enjoying the highest opposition leader ratings since Tony Blair, and he was even ahead of the PM in most ‘Best PM’ polls. Although only the first step had been taken, it had been a great first calendar year in the role.

Keir’s the Antidote

Usually, a party leadership victory would ensure front-page headlines, interview spreads, and immense exposure across the various news channel. However, the extraordinary times we are in meant that until recently Keir Starmer’s leadership had been a quiet one. Nevertheless, Boris Johnson has now been served notice by his opponent that he means business.

Last week the Labour leader put the PM to the sword over the death toll in care homes, unearthing the pre-March 12 government guidance to care homes that stated: “it remains very unlikely that people receiving care in a care home or the community will become infected”. Then, referring to ONS figures that suggest at least 40% of COVID-19 deaths have occurred in care homes, he asked the PM to take responsibility and accept the government was too slow to act.

Instead of accepting, Johnson falsely claimed that the government advice put forward by Starmer was not true, but the leader of the opposition had the evidence to hand. After PMQs Starmer also issued a letter to the PM asking him to correct the record, but Johnson again refused to do so. Seemingly the PM is forgetting he is now standing across from a lawyer at the despatch box, and you would have thought he would have learned his lesson from the warning shot the previous week.

Two weeks ago, again at PMQs, the Labour leader asked the PM why he could possibly think the UK’s handling of COVID-19 has been a success considering we now had the second-highest death toll globally. When the PM responded by saying now was not the time to make international comparisons, Starmer waved around the government’s own comparison charts, highlighting his initial point.