Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
It is rarely a good plan for political parties to rubbish their record in government, not least because voters might decide to believe them. If you want a leading indicator of a party heading for a long spell in opposition, look for the one which will not defend its period in office.
Until recently Labour was the market leader in finding fault with its time in power. It is a striking facet of Britain’s main opposition party that many of its members seem to see government as the place where their ideals are betrayed. Nowhere was that more evident than in the years after Tony Blair’s New Labour project. His successors defined themselves against him for reasons well beyond the Iraq war. The consequence was that no one spoke up for the benefits of the only Labour government in recent memory. The party’s route down the ideological byways towards Corbynism began with the disclaiming of Blair.
Tories generally play up the past by drawing direct lines from the greats — Churchill or Thatcher — to the current leadership, while overlooking the less celebrated. When they forgot this lesson, for example in the European infighting during and after John Major’s government, they endured their longest spell in opposition in modern times.
All defeated parties need to show voters they have learnt from their “mistakes”. Smart ones do not allow this to become a narrative of total worthlessness.
Having initially joined in the disavowal, Sir Keir Starmer is now reclaiming Blair, associating himself with the former premier and talking up his administration’s achievements. This is good politics. People are more likely to elect a Labour government if they believe the last one was not too bad.
But while Labour is being taught to love Blair, leading Conservatives have spent the past year telling voters all that is wrong with their government. Or, more accurately, they have skipped over true failings and fixated on others instead, but the effect is the same.
The criticisms made by the Tory right and its media outriders are not about lockdown breaches, dishonesty or financial recklessness. Instead they condemn Rishi Sunak’s government for being insufficiently conservative, keeping taxes too high, betraying Brexit, failing to control immigration and succumbing to the “socialism” of net zero. One cabinet minister complains they set constant tests “of whether you are a real Brexiter or not”.
This matters, not only for what it tells us about Labour’s chances but because it also denies Sunak his best hope of avoiding or at least minimising defeat.
It has not helped that the prime minister has at times played the same game. Even while presenting himself as a traditional Conservative focused on good government and sound public finances, Sunak has also styled himself as a change candidate, disavowing the mistakes of his liberal, pro-European, status quo-loving predecessors — this position held at least until he brought David Cameron back into government.
While the unique circumstances of the Brexit crisis allowed Boris Johnson to win by turning on his party’s recent history, Sunak has been too nervous of rounding on Johnson to repeat the trick, which in any case will probably not work a second time.
Finally there are signs that the leadership is stumbling towards the unsensational approach — one favoured by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor — of making the case for their own record.
One variant might run: “We said we would get Brexit done and we did. (Clearly this only appeals to Leavers but the Tories had a lot of those at the last election). Two huge crises then hit: first the pandemic and then Ukraine-fuelled inflation. Through the furlough scheme we saved millions of jobs; we drove forward the vaccine rollout with great success. We led the west in support to Ukraine and our energy bill support saved families from a cost of living crisis. Yes, we had to raise taxes because, having saved people twice over, we made the tough decisions to get the finances back in order before the next crisis hits.” Private focus groups identify these “successes” as the only positives cited by voters. On this basis, Conservatives can try to argue Labour would be worse.
The eagle-eyed will spot the flaws. This argument may have some validity but voters may be more inclined to remember the chaos, incompetence, austerity, the Truss errors — and those who thought the rules did not apply to them. The Covid inquiry is remorselessly highlighting errors in the response. Only one of Sunak’s five tests has yet been met, on lower inflation.
It may be there is no strategy that can save the Tories but standing up for their record has three benefits. First, it is a recognisably Conservative message, offering wavering supporters a reason to stick with Sunak, especially if Labour wilts under the campaign spotlight. Second, in the event of defeat, it helps mainstream Tories place blame where it actually lies, with the ideologues and chancers. This, third, may help stave off the self-indulgent lurch that prolongs the time in opposition.
Can this save Sunak? Probably not. But this is not just the only hope of narrowing the gap with Labour, it can shorten the long years out of power that await those parties which disappear down the rabbit hole of self-denunciation. Alternatively, the Tories can discover the hard way that voters will draw the obvious conclusion about a party that cannot or will not defend its record in office.
robert.shrimsley@ft.com