Stay updated on UK politics and policy with our free newsletter.
Subscribe to receive a daily email digest, the myFT Daily Digest, that rounds up the latest news on UK politics and policy every morning.
In the future, the upcoming UK campaign may be remembered as the election of hopelessness, a competition between two parties vying for the support of voters who doubt either will significantly improve their lives or the country as a whole.
The lack of hope is tangible. People feel overwhelmed by inflation, decreasing living standards, strikes, public service crises, and a general sense of decline. Brexit is now widely seen as a mistake by the majority of voters. The Labour Party has yet to fill the void. Politics seems to be a battle with low expectations. To quote Aaron Sorkin, voters feel they are being asked “to choose between the lesser of ‘who cares?'”.
Polling conducted by the left-leaning New Britain Project reveals that almost three-fifths of voters believe “nothing in Britain works anymore”. Even more concerning is that only a fifth believe politicians have the capability to solve the nation’s biggest issues.
Labour leaders are rightly concerned about this trend, as it could also lead to reduced voter turnout. “The Conservatives are diminishing hope by encouraging the perception that no party could do any better,” says a senior Labour strategist.
Promoting the idea that things have become so bleak that no one can fix them has limited benefits for the governing party. However, the claim is not entirely baseless. The Tories want to convince potential supporters not to take the risk of replacing Rishi Sunak. If voters believe that Keir Starmer offers no improvement, then the bar for Sunak becomes much lower.
This is the rationale behind Sunak’s “pledge card” approach. By outlining five promises that he expects to fulfill, Sunak aims to establish himself as a reliable problem solver. While the results of this approach may be uncertain, the Tories still hope for enough progress to present a plausible argument. One cabinet minister states, “This year is about building up Rishi so next year we can offer hope around a better economy, immigration control, Brexit freedoms, and Britain’s place in the world.”
In reality, this appears to be more of the same. Luke Tryl, director of the research group More in Common, argues that “The Tories are struggling on loss aversion because people don’t think they would lose very much if they fell.” Despite Labour’s lead in the polls, many compare the lukewarm support for Starmer to the enthusiasm for Tony Blair in 1997. It is in this shortfall that hope should reside.
One challenge for Labour may be their “broken Britain” narrative. While it is an effective slogan for criticizing the government’s record, it also contributes to the broader feeling of hopelessness. A more optimistic tone, such as “Britain can do better,” may be less discouraging.
Labour loyalists have another concern: that the desire to offer hope will result in reckless spending commitments. “The hope problem is real,” says one frontbencher, “but it cannot lead to a spree of unfunded spending pledges. That approach is ineffective.” For Starmer, confidence in Labour’s control of public finances must be the foundation for all policy decisions.
And it’s possible that voters’ lack of faith isn’t entirely unfounded. The UK faces significant technological, environmental, financial, and geopolitical challenges. Public services require substantial reform alongside increased funding. Yet both parties only seem to offer painless solutions. Labour avoids discussing the necessary tax increases to fund public services, while the Tories steer clear of talking about spending cuts. Both sides emphasize reform as a magical, cost-free option. However, their track record on long-term plans, from nuclear power to social care, has been woeful. On both sides, voter expectations are being managed downwards.
So what can Starmer do? One ally suggests that he needs to remind voters that governments can make a difference. This means highlighting the achievements of the early Blair years, such as the introduction of the minimum wage and reduced NHS waiting times.
It also requires taking calculated risks. According to one pollster, focus groups responded favorably to Starmer’s recent call for planning reform to boost housebuilding, as it indicated a strong stance. Starmer and Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, were probably wise to adjust their unaffordable £28bn-a-year green plan, but diluting too many promises can make the promise of change appear like business as usual.
Starmer has made many correct moves. He has made his party electable as voters abandon the government. His recent speech on providing hope through economic security was perfectly delivered. Next week, he will outline his plan to “break down barriers to opportunity”. He doesn’t need a drastic change of strategy or countless new policies that voters doubt will be fulfilled. However, in addition to the long-term, ambitious policies, Starmer needs to explain how his government would improve people’s lives within the first year.
And voters need to see more of the courage he displayed in defeating the hard left. While Starmer’s caution, particularly in terms of spending, is understandable, voters respond to strong leadership.
This is not a call for reckless risks or more empty optimism. However, among all of the UK’s problems, the loss of hope is the most concerning. From the NHS to schools to living standards, voters need at least one major party to provide a sense of direction to a nation that feels stagnant, even if the journey is challenging. The potential rewards could be tremendous. For Labour, being a persuasive voice of hope may be the difference between winning outright or falling short.
There is also a broader cost for Britain if fatalism takes root. If voters cannot find reasons for hope within the traditional parties, they may turn to populists for solutions.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
