A poll conduced at the end of February by Ipsos-MORI for The Economist shows that the economy continues to be the public's most pressing concern. This is potentially a double-edged sword for Labour. The public still blame Labour, rather than the banks for the deficit. Moving beyond that will be easier said than done.
A poll conduced at the end of February by Ipsos-MORI for The Economist shows that the economy continues to be the public’s most pressing concern.
This is potentially a double-edged sword for Labour.
With the increasingly influential presence of Lynton Crosby in the Tory camp, not to mention the loss of the Eastleigh by-election, David Cameron will come under increasing pressure from Tory backbenchers to shift policy further to the Right.
Nothing new here of course.
An excellent (separate) piece for the Economist today notes that in the run up to the 2005 election, an emboldened Tory Right sought to “shift…emphasis [in the party] away from public services towards immigration, crime and, of course, Europe…”.
They largely succeeded, resulting in a calamitous electoral defeat for Tory leader Michael Howard in a winnable election.
Backbench ideologues rarely learn lessons from history, so expect Cameron to face similar demands as worried MPs sense weakness on the back of humiliations like that in Eastleigh.
Labour can, indeed, take a degree of solace from the prospect of the Tories scrabbling around to prevent their core vote indulging Nigel Farage’s protest party.
No more than a degree of solace, though.
While Ed Miliband has been wise to turn his attention to economic concerns of late in the form of (largely symbolic) policy proposals on the mansion tax and the 10p tax rate, Labour is still suffering badly when voters are asked about the economy, as a poll for YouGov this week showed.
Q a) Which party would handle Britain’s economy best?
Q b) Who would you trust more to run the economy?
| a) Which party? | b) Which team? | ||||||
| Con | Lab | Other/ Don’t know | Cameron/ Osborne | Miliband/ Balls | Not sure | ||
| % | % | % | % | % | % | ||
| Apr 2012 | 28 | 27 | 45 | 36 | 28 | 35 | |
| Jul 2012 | 27 | 26 | 47 | 34 | 31 | 35 | |
| Oct 2012 | 26 | 28 | 46 | n/a | n/a | n/a | |
| Dec 2012 | 28 | 27 | 45 | 37 | 26 | 37 | |
| Feb 2013 | 27 | 29 | 44 | 35 | 29 | 37 |
As Peter Kelner phrased it:
“Almost three years after Gordon Brown left Downing Street, more people still blame Labour rather than the Conservatives for the state of the economy and the public spending cuts that Osborne has imposed. Secondly, when asked who they trust more to run the economy, more people still prefer Cameron and Osborne to Miliband and Balls.”
While Labour is right to focus on the economy – it is voters’ main concern and Osborne is the government’s biggest liability – doing so is a double-edged sword. It is potentially Labour’s strongest area of attack, but it also risks a damaging boomerang effect.
Moving beyond the fact that the public appear to still blame Labour, rather than the banks, for the deficit will be easier said than done.
In the public mind, the party is still stuck in the Gordon Brown era, and the failure to win the argument in 2009/10 that it was the banks rather than the government which was to blame for the crisis still hangs around the party’s neck like an albatros.
142 Responses to “Labour is still struggling to leave the Brown era behind”
blarg1987
It neded reform but was in the wrong way, the reason it chose PFi over borrowing was because it was more plotically appealling to the masses if it got in using none PFI schemes its credibility as a party would be far stroinger now. This iss one example i can name many more.
PR is actually more democratic, as what you would get is a more overall view of society, so if say the left suffenly gained a large number of seats, goverment would realise it needs to change policies to appease and deal with concerns rather then hold its head in the sand just as UKIP is now onlyu difference is that UKIP has very wealthy donors which the left does not have.
A party shoudl say what it stands for if it gets voted in then fine, if business has concerns they should discuss it with the party, it is called democracy, it is the number of people who should decide goverment and plocy not the people with the biggest pockets.
Mick
I never doubted workfare was flawed. And to play devil’s advocate, I also understand the State refunds your bus fare for a while and that benefit caps are supposed to halt excess. That benefits woman with the big house and horse are the kind of thing that’s designed to stop.
The Scandinavians help themselves outside the EU as their own economies have been more secure without the Single Currency or rule via Brussels. You can’t on the one hand say they’re a unique example to us all, then extol the very EU who try and persuade/force member nations to do everything the same way.
And the EU again – it was fine when it was advertised as a group of trading nations. But as a self-autonomous and non-accountable pretend-nation with its own Monopoly money, it’s too heavy to float right. You can’t even have MEPs propose and pass their own legislation, they’re just a plebiscite house for the unelected European Commission which makes all the rules.
The cash the EU costs us in membership fees alone could help the NHS or other social things you think are sacred. They’re hardly gonna punish us and anything ‘good’ you say they do can be just as easily done by our people, if voters vote they way you want.
Mick
Wikipedia links to valid sources. They’re all at the bottom of the articles. You say you’re not ‘other lefties’, but act like them when moaning I use Google and such.
Mick
If community service worked, then there’s no harm in having it. But criminals did re-offend during CS: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9488893/400-criminals-a-week-reoffend-during-community-punishment.html
If they’re gonna do it then do it right. Crims in jail in America are sent out to work dressed in orange and chains, then put back inside for the night. They don’t nip off to commit crimes then. And speaking as a member of the public, one of many, I don’t want criminals near me or outside, full stop.
Newsbot9
Ah yes. since because it’s not 100% effective, you want to shut it down. And chain gangs are a *wonderful* way of creating criminals, linked with very high re-offending rate.
And you’re near yourself, sadly for you. Keep on trying to generate far more criminals, ignoring what actually works for an emotional reaction.