The 1970s are back: well, without the flares, the roller discos and the other good bits. Inflation and a flatlining economy have combined with the classic Tory toxic brew of migrant-bashing and union-baiting.
It’s hardly a coincidence. A rightwing party confronted with escalating social and economic turmoil is always tempted to press a big red button emblazoned with “conjure up bogeymen to divert popular anger”.
Back then, Margaret Thatcher spoke of the public being “really rather afraid that this country might be rather swamped by people with a different culture”, while newspaper headlines excoriated “union militants”. Today, the government vows to continue with its deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, despite Tuesday’s last-minute reprieve, while also planning to tighten the already choking vice of anti-union legislation in response to the upcoming national rail strike. Anything to distract from the surging cost of bread, pasta or energy which is eroding people’s living standards.
On both fronts, the Tories take aim at weakness on the part of their Labour opponents. They know they have a clear and uncompromising message, while Labour lacks any coherent position. Those in charge don’t believe that opposition parties can make political weather, and instead have to bend to where swing voters are. According to received party wisdom, these voters are anti-migrant and anti-union. This presents an issue for a party whose membership is pro-migrant and whose support – and financial base – is derived from the union movement.
The view of Labour’s strategists on this is straightforward: sidestep the issue, avoid getting bogged down in controversy and wait for the storm to pass. There may be more to be said for this approach if Labour had an alternative issue to focus media attention on, but it does not, and so the conversation remains focused on the issues the Tory party wants to dominate.
Unable to shift the debate, Labour leaves itself open to attacks from its base, the public and the Tory party. The leadership may alienate its base by not standing by workers and migrants; the general public may interpret its intransigence as insincerity; and the Conservative party is able to define its opponents’ position.
The lawyerly instincts of Keir Starmer speak to talking in terms of process, rather than moral conviction, but that leaves voters – who are human beings, not robots – cold. However, there is an opportunity for the leader to voice the concerns and values shared by the wider public in the face of Tory radicalisation.
Given that anti-migrant hostility has subsided – albeit from alarmingly high levels, and it remains pervasive among millions – Labour has a greater opportunity to make a compelling emotional case for a more compassionate migration policy. Humanising migrants and refugees and emphasising that they are being used as scapegoats for injustices caused by Tory policies will more convincingly cut through, especially if combined with coherent answers to those problems. Labour should go in hard on the real-terms pay cuts that workers are facing due to price rises outstripping wage increases, and support the railway workers who are standing up for themselves and their families.
It can be done. On Question Time last week, the shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, said, “If I were a member of the RMT and my jobs [sic] were at risk like this then I would be voting to go on strike and I would be voting to defend my job’s terms and conditions. If I were a government minister right now, it’s not my job to be on the picket line, it’s not my job to be condemning unions – it’s my job to solve the problem, to get people around the table, to make sure passengers aren’t inconvenienced.” That answer may be driven by cynical political positioning as he manoeuvres for the leadership, but it shows Labour politicians can make a persuasive case for trade union action if they choose to.
Labour’s current polling lead is driven entirely by Tory self-immolation, but its own MPs are increasingly aware that in the absence of a clear vision for the country this advantage could soon evaporate. So rather than churn out confused messaging that risks alienating both Labour’s natural supporters and the swing voters that Starmer’s team wishes to attract, better to speak with conviction and emotional intelligence. Rather than battening down the hatches and waiting for these storms to pass, the opposition has far more power to shape the political weather than it realises.
Owen Jones is a Guardian columnist
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 300 words to be considered for publication, email it to us at guardian.letters@theguardian.com
