Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
Crises appear to bring out the best in Keir Starmer, whether faced with challenges in Southport, Ukraine, or the White House. Amid the uncertainties created by Donald Trump’s policies, Starmer’s recent proclamations at a car factory in Solihull included reassurances of “we have your back” and calls for “further and faster” actions to align with his stark assertion that “the world as we knew it has gone.” Political analyst Professor John Curtice notes that the Prime Minister excels in managing bad news, suggesting that navigating through crises is his strong suit.
Despite the global upheaval, discussions with voters in Runcorn and Helsby in anticipation of an upcoming by-election revealed that concerns about potential economic turmoil from Trump and his tariffs had not yet resonated with the electorate. However, such worries are likely on the horizon.
One Labour supporter and employee at the Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) facility in Halewood dismissed the potential impact of a 25% tariff on British car exports to the US, commenting that affluent American consumers would likely absorb the price increase. Yet mere hours later, JLR announced a halt to all shipments to the US, sending ripples of anxiety through the British automotive sector, which supports around 200,000 jobs.
Although the weather was pleasant with clear skies, a sense of underlying caution pervaded the atmosphere. Labour had previously secured a commanding 52.9% of the vote in the area, but recent events, including an incident involving former MP Mike Amesbury, have shifted dynamics. Reform UK has begun to close the gap behind Labour’s stronghold in this constituency situated along the Mersey River, where demographic trends show a high percentage of the electorate voted to leave the EU, and community profiles reflect above-average rates of home and car ownership.
Polling specific to this constituency remains sparse and often unreliable. Nevertheless, Curtice suggests that the Electoral Calculus projection of 36.6% for Labour and 28% for Reform may be accurate. Labour’s confidence is dwindling; with rapidly changing news cycles, the implications of voter sentiment by May 1st remain uncertain.
These brief interactions with voters hint at their concerns and considerations. A Labour voter expressing her disappointment noted, “I thought there’d be change,” despite previously being a steadfast supporter. Immigration was a top concern for her, but she ruled out any support for Nigel Farage’s party, firmly stating they would “tear up their leaflets.”
Other traditional Labour voters also exhibited mixed feelings. A retired woman expressed hesitations regarding the party’s standing, citing her discomfort with individuals at a nearby hostel, reflecting a sense of unease regarding immigration. Conversely, another long-time Labour supporter justified his loyalty by pointing to the party’s stance on benefits, remarking on how other parties merely represented “fat cats” and expressing a desire to give Labour time to rectify the country’s trajectory.
One individual, greeted with a towel wrapped around her head, raised concerns about the lack of promised change post-election. In response, Labour MP Matthew Patrick highlighted positive developments such as decreasing NHS waiting lists, increases in minimum wage and pensions, and expansions of early educational programs. While acknowledging the progress, she remained undecided, stating, “I might be persuaded.”
Nationally, polls reveal widespread disillusionment. According to Gideon Skinner from Ipsos, many voters feel Labour has failed to deliver the anticipated changes. “Reform takes on that mantle of change now,” he noted, highlighting that in tense political climates, voters often react against the government, potentially benefiting Reform’s positioning, though the long-term viability of this trend remains questionable. Many view Farage as a divisive figure rather than a symbol of constructive change.
Reform’s core appeal rests on slogans such as “freeze immigration and stop the boats,” which resonates with a significant portion of the public that desires reduced immigration. However, UK attitudes diverge from broader European sentiments; last year 66% of those surveyed indicated that immigration had a positive economic impact. Moreover, Britain stands out for its relatively liberal views on social issues.
On policy matters, Reform’s focus lacks synchronization with public sentiment. Their proposals, such as reversing Labour’s cuts to winter fuel, focusing on scrapping net zero regulations, and tax reductions, do not align with majority public opinions that generally support maintaining or increasing taxes and endorse the net zero target. Additionally, Labour has pointedly criticized Farage’s admiration for an insurance-based NHS model, presenting it as a dangerous proposition.
Should Reform gain traction on May 1, it would serve as a stark reminder of the electorate’s broader dissatisfaction, notably with Starmer’s leadership. As he celebrates his fifth anniversary at the helm, only half of those who voted for Labour last year claim to understand what he stands for. Although constituents perceive defence and security as strengths, Curtice suggests that the current political landscape leaves both Labour and the Conservatives squeezed between left and right extremes.
If Starmer is genuine in his aim for urgent reforms, it may signal a departure from both the familiar world he referred to and his prior cautious approach. His insistence that “old assumptions can no longer be taken for granted” may imply a necessary shift not just in policy but within his own leadership style and that of his team. In a notable display of optimism, Starmer asserted that Labour aims to “create wealth in every corner and deliver security for everyone, everywhere,” emphasizing the need for breaking free from restrictive norms and fostering an environment of enthusiasm within his cabinet. Ultimately, this aligns with the electorate’s demand for substantive change.
Source
www.theguardian.com