by Frieda Park

It is a welcome relief to see the back of the Tories. The Labour government opens up opportunities but there will be massive challenges for the movement in trying to turn these into a real progress for working people in Britain.

SHAKY FOUNDATIONS 

Though it achieved a huge number of seats Labour did so on the back of voter abstention, a struggling SNP and a divided right. Overall the turnout was 67.3% down 1.6% on the last election, but with much bigger drops in some places like Scotland and Wales.

The FT columnist Robert Shrimsley called the 2024 election result “Labour’s loveless landslide”. He also commented that Keir Starmer started with “a shallower reservoir of goodwill than any modern predecessor”.  Starmer had the lowest number of votes of any first time Prime Minister since the war, achieving only 33.7% of the vote, and the second lowest turnout in more than a century. This was “against a government that the electorate were desperate to remove.” (Financial Times 28/8/24)

A sign of how little faith people placed in Labour could be seen in polling at the end of August which showed that 51% of UK adults were dissatisfied with the government, up by 20 points in a month. Labour has had no honeymoon: it is clear that people want something other from Starmer than doom-laden messages about cuts.

More people voted Labour under Jeremy Corbyn than under Starmer in both the elections when Corbyn was leader. Labour got 10.3 million votes in the last election in 2019, which fell to 9.7 million in 2024. Labour’s vote share was up only slightly from 2019, but down on 2017. So Labour’s remarkable victory in terms of seats won (411) should be understood not so much in terms of Starmer’s success, as by the collapse of the Tories and the SNP and by the role played by the establishment and its media in transmitting the message that it was time for the Tories to go and that Labour should be the voters’ choice to make this happen.

The political figures in charge of Kier Starmer had for a long time implemented a strategy of saying and promising as little as possible to the electorate and of making the Labour Party as agreeable as possible to big business and the establishment. In making a decisive break with the promise of progressive policies under Corbyn and purging the left, Labour gained the endorsement of business figures. However, from the statistics, we can see that the electorate was less impressed by Starmer’s shift to the right than was capital - his policies seem to have convinced few.

This was evident across the so-called Red Wall, where Labour regained almost all the seats they lost to the Tories in 2019, but increased vote share from 38% to only 41% with the Tories declining from 47% to 24% and Reform gaining 22%, so the two combined were about the same as the Tories had previously got. The vote for the right, therefore, remained as strong but was split, and this allowed Labour in.

The upswing in trade union action has not led to more evident support for Labour, nor have the protests over Gaza with the negative policies of the leadership, undermining rather than boosting support for Labour.

THE TORIES SHIFT RIGHT 

In terms of seats won (121) this was the worst result in the Tory Party’s long history as the pre-eminent Party of British capitalism. The significance of this cannot be underestimated. The key element in the Tories’ defeat was their catastrophic failure to effectively represent the interests of the majority of the ruling class which crystallised over Brexit and became worse as the Party shifted towards the far right, depending on tactics of racism, and divide and rule through culture wars. The result is that the Conservatives are no longer the broad-based establishment party capable of uniting different strata of society round ruling class objectives that they once were. This is a historic shift. It remains to be seen whether it can be reversed but it feels increasingly unlikely.

More moderate Tories have been driven from the Party, either through Johnson’s purge or because they have just given up. Ironically the more the right of the Conservative Party promotes racist and divisive politics the more they fuel other groups and parties of the right which in turn are seen as a threat to the Tories who then react by moving further to the right. The result of the General Election, with the successes of Labour and the Lib Dems, clearly showed the limitations of this approach, but can the Tories escape from this vicious circle of their own creation? If not, then might they cease to be of value to the ruling class?

The rise of the far right is a product of neo-liberalism which has not delivered and indeed refuses to deliver for working people. The far right usefully channels dissatisfaction with people’s miserable lives to negate any potential challenge from the left, attacking targets other than capital. Without the threat of a socialist alternative, neo-liberalism feels that it does not need to accommodate demands from its people for a better life. It is wedded to the maximum exploitation of the working class globally and opposed to anything that mitigates that. It scarcely tolerates mildly social democratic reforms and even without the prospect of socialist revolution the far right is promoted. But although pro-capital, the far right and its successes can still be challenging to the establishment with outcomes it does not want and there is the perennial risk of it becoming too successful like Trump in America, or Johnson here. A question for the neo-liberal strategists is how to contain popular dissatisfaction while maintaining control of the political process so that it doesn’t go to the left or too far right.

SCOTLAND AND WALES

A further boost to Labour came from the collapse of the SNP vote. It lost 39 seats, taking its total down to 9. It lost the entire central belt of Scotland where most of the population lives. The SNP’s credibility has been severely undermined by the financial corruption crisis affecting its previous leadership; political errors that it made, partly the result of its coalition with the Greens, in particular the debacle round the Gender Recognition Act; and an undercurrent that the nationalists are not delivering for the people of Scotland in areas such as education and health. Continuing to blame Westminster, saying that problems would all be solved if only Scotland was independent, has begun to wear thin. The pro-Starmer establishment propaganda also had an effect, clearly sign-posting that voting Labour was the way to get rid of the Tories. Humza Yusaf who replaced Nicola Sturgeon as First Minister was a weak leader, eventually botching the effort to oust the Greens from the government leading to his own resignation.

The fall from grace of the SNP has been sudden and dramatic – they once seemed unassailable with capable, credible leaders, but there had been underlying problems for some time. Principally these were divisions over tactics to achieve independence and increasing friction between the former leader Alex Salmond and his one-time protege and successor, Nicola Sturgeon. Salmond’s acquittal on sexual assault charges was a blow to Sturgeon who expected his political challenge to be negated if he was found guilty. Having said that, Salmond’s Alba party has so far made no electoral impact on the fortunes of the SNP.

But this does not necessarily mark a return to politics as usual in Scotland with overwhelming Labour representation. Support for independence remains at around 50% and a generation has grown up with their politics framed by the constitution. In addition, as in other parts of the UK, voter turn-out was down – in Scotland by 8.4%. The difference in vote share between Labour and the SNP was 5.3%. This points to another weakness underlying the huge majority achieved by Labour – the potential fragility of its success in Scotland.

In Wales the Tories lost all their seats to Labour, Plaid Cymru and the Lib Dems with a 10% drop in turnout and overall a swing away from Labour of 3.9%.

THE OTHER PARTIES 

The third biggest share of the vote went to Reform UK 14.3%, though they won only 5 seats, due to the concentration of their support in Brexit voting constituencies. They showed strongly in many seats that they failed to win. Not only Reform, other parties had notable successes. The Lib Dems got 72 seats, their best result since 1923, and the Greens won 4. Jeremy Corbyn was re-elected as an independent with massive support and 4 other independents won seats standing on the issue of Gaza. They have now formed a parliamentary group.

It is hard to estimate the lasting impact of some of these developments. It would be dangerous to dismiss them, but equally dangerous to think that they all represent permanent trends. Some may be more long-lasting than others.

Even the bigger minority parties still have a way to go in becoming strong enough across the UK to challenge Labour and the much diminished Conservative Party. Yet we have moved into a time of increasingly unstable politics, disengagement and more fluid allegiances. Can the Lib Dems and Reform make further gains? Can the SNP revive? For the smaller parties a question will remain as to whether or not they can hold onto their seats, never mind build on them – especially the independents. The establishment will, of course, try to shape these developments to suit its interests.

REFORM UK 

Reform UK currently represents a major threat both in terms of its politics and electorally. The five seats won by the party were all won from the Tories in the South East of England, apart from Ashfield in Nottinghamshire which Lee Anderson retained. But there is also a challenge to Labour. Farage has said post the election that he is not interested in an alliance or merger with the Tories. Instead he says, "We're going to focus on going after the Labour vote". He will also be campaigning for the introduction of PR.

Reform made strong showings and not only in the so-called Red Wall constituencies; it had wider success, coming second in 98 constituencies. Aside from the constituencies it won, the next highest vote shares it got were: Barnsley South 33.2%, Makerfield 31.8%, Hull East 30.6%, Rotherham 30.3% and Castle Point 30.1%, coming second in all of them. Labour held the first four of these and the Conservatives the fifth.

There has been a long term decline in support for Labour in many constituencies where it was previously dominant. This is at least partly an effect of deindustrialisation and the decline of working class organisation and socialist ideas. Dissatisfaction was galvanised around the Brexit referendum, and the failure of Corbyn and McDonnell to straightforwardly respect the Leave vote led to the collapse of the Red Wall and the shift to parties of the right. It is concerning that this pattern has persisted into the 2024 election even if the vote was split between the Tories and Reform.

The shift to the right of the Tories and the rise of Reform have legitimised and promoted racist ideas so that they not only now have a hold – they were always there – but have been given political expression. Perhaps also Reform is more acceptable than the Tories to former Labour voters. The challenge of the right in many working class and other constituencies is real, but fortunately at present divided. How can that be changed?

EXPECTATIONS OF LABOUR

An important part of the answer to this question is how Labour performs in government. “You’ve got one chance”, was a phrase uttered by reluctant Labour voters during the election campaign but does the Labour leadership understand that they are effectively on probation? The danger of taking Labour voters for granted has been evident on more than one occasion – in Scotland, over Brexit and in this election on Gaza.

Barring the new deal for working people, Labour promised not a lot so they didn’t have to do much to exceed expectations. Settling the public sector pay disputes was a smart move, damping down trade union militancy and bringing a sense of responsible government. There is an improved position on Gaza albeit it still does not go anything like far enough, with a partial suspension of arms sales, refunding UNRWA, ending opposition to an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and calling for a ceasefire. There have been other progressive moves compared with the Tories, who have virtually disappeared from view consumed by yet another leadership contest.

However we have also seen the punitive suspension of Labour MPs over the 2 child benefit cap. And there has been the cut to winter fuel payments and other cuts, such as to railway projects. Rachel Reeves continues to threaten public services with her fiscal rules and Tory blackholes and now Starmer says things will get worse before they get better. Starmer has also has had a high profile meeting with Olaf Scholz to engineer a closer relationship to Germany and the EU. Worst of all the government is enthusiastically joining in with the West’s murderous drive to war.

Much as the ruling class might like these policies, if Labour is to succeed austerity, cuts and war will not be good enough. It cannot rely on the continued failure of the Tories and the SNP, it must make people’s lives better so that they will have a positive reason to vote for the Party. Living standards need to improve and all aspects of public services – health, education, local government funding to rebuild communities and social housing. But so far there is no sense of commitment to this. A failure to deliver will result in a move back to the right and to nationalism.

The movement needs to demand more. As the public sector pay offers demonstrate, fiscal rules - which are political rather than scientific - are there to be broken. Yet the progress made by the unions in improving members’ living standards may well have the immediate effect of damping down class struggle and protest.

The West’s backing for Israel’s genocide in Gaza has helped an understanding of the US role as the main threat to world peace. However, in the peace movement ultra-left and liberal voices are still strong, arguing ‘a plague on everyone’s house’ and effectively letting the US off the hook, particularly in relation to Ukraine. The lack of a strong peace movement has enabled the militarist wing of the Trade Union movement to make progress in arguing for increased arms expenditure.

Maintaining pressure on the Labour government to deliver better, through the unions and class struggle, will be essential for the working class and in Labour’s own interests if this electoral result is not to be a one off.  Likewise, it will be necessary through political activity and the peace movement to try to erode Labour’s support for the West’s drive to war and to get justice for the Palestinians. For that we need to develop a better understanding of imperialism and to make a central argument for spending on welfare not warfare.

These are real discussions because Labour can be pressurised by the trade unions, the left and even those not particularly left wing who see electoral disaster next time round if Labour doesn’t deliver. We need to do what we can to build an effective and more mature left which is non-sectarian and spends less time on divisive culture wars and diversionary schemes. We need rather to aim to build unity round vital concerns, like housing and local amenities and services – and to build a left that is for peace and against war. In doing this we will also present the most effective challenge to the right and its divide and rule tactics. 

 

Keir Starmer meets Olaf Scholz in Berlin. photo by Simon Dawson

The key element in the Tories’ defeat was their catastrophic failure to effectively represent the interests of the majority of the ruling class which crystallised over Brexit and became worse as the Party shifted towards the far right, depending on tactics of racism, and divide and rule through culture wars.

Trade unions and campaigners fighting cuts. photo by midnightblueowl