The Confidence Trick
The Confidence Trick
'No Complacency' is only fine as far as it goes. But Labour must show readiness for government and that means acting into the role.
No complacency. As a New Labour slogan, it’s almost as integral to the brand as the word ‘new’. The terror that losing an election Labour expected to win in 1992 was fundamental to the psychology of New Labour. It drove everything. From the promise to stick to Tory spending plans to the relentless focus on the middle class (at the exclusion - at least rhetorically - of any other discussion of class).
‘No complacency’ isn’t a bad sense to have as a part of a wider ongoing approach. But it’s also sort of meaningless. because no one will ever make the opposite argument. Where are all the people claiming Labour *should* be complacent (as opposed to those being a bit excited and excitable about some really extraordinary polling)? But like too much of what made New Labour work, a response to a very explicit set of circumstances, has come to be seen as an instruction manual set down on stone tablets. It has become a ‘pickled dogma’ - something we trot out unthinkingly without unpacking what we mean or why we say it.
In 1992 Labour lost an election it was widely expected to win and was seen to have done so in part through a sense of hubris. This was talked about both in terms of their being seen to go too far presenting a budget with tax hikes included and presentational - in particular Neil Kinnock’s performance at the infamous Sheffield rally.
We learn a lot from history and from winners. So it isn’t wrong to think about what New Labour got right in the 90s. But we also need to remember quite how different the 90s were from now.
There was no rolling news and no social media in the period before the 1997 election. So basing your communications strategy entirely on a blueprint from that time and expecting MPs and activists to follow along is - frankly - silly. Of course people are going to discuss the minute by minute of politics on Twitter - just the way people would have done in the pub in the 1990s. Labour can’t expect to change human nature. Even if all MPs complied thousands of councillors and activists will be excitedly discussing the latest ups and downs. Don’t pretend that isn’t going to happen - work out how to deal with it.
It is also worth remembering that while the New Labour team were extremely good at communications, one of the things they were best at communicating was how much Labour was modern. As much as their message was ‘Labour isn’t scary anymore’ (something Stamer has managed very effectively post-Corbyn) it was ‘Labour is comfortably modern’ as a sharp contrast to Major’s deeply out of touch fusty Tories.
So while Twitter is hardly ‘modern’ anymore it is certainly part of our modern political landscape. Being good at Twitter doesn’t get you elected. But it does get the attention of political journalists who you want to impress.
New Labour’s spirit of modernity was important not for the things it was saying then about policy but for the sense that Labour was where the country felt itself to be and was comfortable there. Yes, not taking the electorate for granted was important, but equally, so too was just the confidence that you and the electorate are in on it together. That shared sense of mission, humour, vision, dammit - to use a word that has dominated politics recently - vibe.
Roy Jenkins once described pre-97 Tony Blair as “like a man carrying a priceless Ming vase across a highly polished floor”. Which I think was partially right (though to complete the other side of my analogy, he was doing it in an Oasis T shirt and wearing shades). Where the problem sets in, is that this is seen not as a description, but an instruction. You must act that cagily otherwise you can never get elected.
Becuse Labour win so rarely, we forget that there is more than one model of electoral success. The Tories never act as if they are worried they look like they are taking the country for granted. Instead they act as if they are the natural party of government and - until they fuck it up spectacularly - people tend to believe them. Well right now, Labout are the natural party of government. Once again, they will be called upon to go in and clean up the mess the Tories have left the country in. Why shouldn’t Labour project a certain amount of confidence in their ability to do that.
Labour politicians have done a lot of work to get the party’s policy prospectus into such a shape that it is largely costed, largely deliverable and will actually make a real difference in a few key areas. It isn’t the moon on a stick - but it is worth projecting a bit more pride and confidence in their offer.
Tory arrogance is not what I am suggesting Labour offer. The overweening confidence in bad ideas - and I include all of them from Cameron to Sunak - is what has got us into such a mess. But there is a place between humility and arrogance that the country needs Labour to be.
We all need reassurance at the moment. We need it from people we think we can trust. That isn’t Sunak. It could be Keir. But he has to project that confidence. Not only that Things Can Only Get Better - but that they will.
Triggered
The second run of my play Triggered has sold out! I am so pleased that this is happened and I think that beyond what it means for me (Theatre people - I am fucking amazing. Put my shows on.) it shows a real appetite for understanding politics better and creative ways we can do that.
I run a political and communications consultancy called Political Human. Please get in touch if you are looking for political or media consultancy advice, strategic communication and campaign planning, ghostwriting, copywriting, editing, training or coaching.
You can read some lovely things that some of my clients have said here.
What I’ve been up to
I went to see The Key at the White Bear. What starts as an excellent piece of absurdist writing descends into badly executed farce. Much like a Tory government.
I was also quoted extensively on what went so very wrong for Liz Truss in this piece in the Metro.
Welcome
I have had well over 100 sign ups in the last couple of days. You are all exceptionally welcome. I hope you enjoy the (usually roughly fortnightly) email. The traffic has been really high - so do comment or reply to let me know where you found out about me. I’m keen to know what I’m getting right!
A final appeal. This newsletter takes quite a while to think about and write. I know things are really tough all over at the moment, but if you can spare some cash to say you’ve appreciated it, I can’t tell you how much that would mean to me right now.
Questions, comments and arguments are very welcome. Insults will get you summarily blocked on every platform that no longer hosts Donald Trump. I’m at emmaburnell@gmail.com or on Twitter (far too often) at @EmmaBurnell_
Great Piece. Not enough is written about overcorrections and lack of confidence in politics and how this shapes future political outcomes. I mean, there is a big difference from being actually uninspiring or reclusive compared to just giving that vibe off but, in reality, having inventive or radical policy.
1992 --> 1997 is completely correct! Look how it empowered more radical wings within the party, feeling like a missed generational opportunity.
Switch it to the Tories, and I feel 2017 ---> 2019 is another example. Not confident enough to portray a vision of government (arguable if they ever could / wanted to), and spent the campaign fighting it on 2017 battle lines, leaving no plan for government and the right of the party (Truss and co) empowered enough by the gap to push the post-Brexit 'singapore' style economics Vs the underdeveloped Johnsonian big government brexit.
Both TB / BJ got to power, and with great majorities, but both (to varying degrees, of course) left office with regrets of lack of reform / progress. I think you nail it - both for elections and governments. Confidence is key, and its borne out of tough oppo / campaigns, media strat and (as much as they can be without spooking the electorate) foundational manifestos. Without having that belief to do something and unabashedly *sell* it to the country, you will be resigned to doing nothing in government - or worse still, remain in opposition!
I'm 68, I remember '92 and feeling at the time that the triumphalism before the election would provoke a backlash turning positive polls into a negative election result. The electorate - or at least enough of the electorate to turn victory to defeat - are fickle. Even more so now with enough of the electorate aware that negative polling or a by-election defeat could make a government change track - but that doesn't mean they will vote the same way when it comes to a GE.
Yes, Blair had to get the electorate's trust by sticking to Tory spending plans in his first term but could have been more 'Socialist' less neo-classical economist in his second term and embracing the Financial Services sector as the main engine of growth was, IMHO, a big mistake. Hopefully the financial crash in 2008, flat growth due to austerity since 2010, and this latest shambles of the markets rejecting unfunded tax cuts for the rich has made the electorate ready for some home truths. As Mervyn King recently said you can't have European standards of Public Services with USA levels of taxation. I believe the electorate want higher quality public services and are prepared to pay a bit more tax for them if it is fairly shared. Even moderate Tory voters can see that to get growth going and pay for services, that way we need investment at the roots of the economy - a well-educated, healthy workforce, good infrastructure, law and order and a prosperous (or at least not poverty stricken) consumer base.
Rehabilitate Income Tax as the fairest progressive tax, incorporate NI to make it more progressive, introduce many more tax bands, even every 1%, to spread the load, rejig it so the low paid keep more of their pay to spend in their local economies - the money goes round and around and gets sucked up - trickle down doesn't work, scrapping the 50p tax rate didn't work, reducing interest rates down to 0% didn't work, £800bn QE poured in at the top hasn't worked. Putting up interest rates when we need growth is ridiculous. Inflation is being caused by a war not run-away growth, putting up interest rates will reduce growth and cause unemployment designed to reduce wage rates - that is how it is supposed to reduce inflation and it should be unacceptable in a modern society. We need to produce more here but putting up interest rates artificially bolsters the £ - that may be good short term for the price of imported goods - but longer term it makes our exports more expensive making the negative trade balance worse as well as being a strategic mistake.
Top earners shouldn't have to pay more because they have the broadest shoulders - that's charity - they should pay more because they benefit most from the growth brought about by paying low earners more and leaving more in low earners pay packets. As I say, it gets sucked-up it doesn't trickle down.