Support our Nation today - please donate here
Opinion

Entropy & Chaos

06 Oct 2024 5 minute read
Sue Gray. Photo Aaron Chown/PA Wire

Ben Wildsmith

By the end of Tony Blair’s first hundred days in office his government had announced devolution referendums in Wales and Scotland, an independent Bank of England, minimum wage legislation, costed plans to reduce class sizes and NHS waiting lists, and significant progress towards the following year’s signing of the Good Friday Agreement.

As we learn that Sue Gray, Keir Starmer’s Chief of Staff, has stepped down 93 days after the election, it’s not unreasonable to make a comparison.

In the years between John Smith’s death and the 1997 election, all but one of the policies mentioned had become familiar to the UK public. The Bank of England policy was held back as a statement of intent for the new government, indicating that it was unafraid to make bold decisions.

The personalities of Blair’s cabinet: Gordon Brown, Jack Straw, Robin Cook etc. had also been established in the national consciousness and explicitly linked to the briefs they would hold. So, when New Labour came to power, we knew what to expect and who was delivering it.

Discipline

To govern in a radical way, Blair knew that message discipline, repetition, and familiar faces were the keys to reassuring a cautious public. With John Major’s Conservatives exhausted from 18 years in power and mired in sleaze, Blair and his communications chief, Alastair Campbell persuaded the UK that significant change was the responsible course of action.

All of the above seems obvious in retrospect but required sound political instincts in its formulation.

Nearly a hundred days into Starmer’s first term, his government has lost control of the narrative. The most recognisable policy decision has been to cut winter fuel payments to the elderly, whilst the news agenda has been dominated by tales of questionable gifts to MPs and donations to party funds.

It’s fair to point out that Blair inherited a healthier economy than Starmer enjoys but the mechanics of politics remain the same. Governments must take bold action upon assuming office. There are two reasons for this: public goodwill is at its highest straight after an election, and it tells the world that detailed plans were made during the party’s time in opposition.

Aside from the granny-freezing, we are still waiting for announcements that would allow us all to discern the shape of the government we have.

Unworkable

Plans to introduce VAT on private school fees are reportedly unworkable, whilst unions warn that promised legislation on workers’ rights is being steadily diluted at the urging of business leaders. An impression is forming that the government is unsure as to what it stands for. The resignation of Sue Gray so early in the day can only fuel accusations of rudderless leadership.

Tony Blair’s embrace of George W Bush’s policies in the Middle East sits alongside the disastrous economics of PFI and a failure to address the needs of post-industrial communities as a lasting stain on Labour governance. Many will never forgive him for it.

His government was, however, consequential. In its first term it was a model of legislative energy and efficient presentation. These virtues flowed from the political instincts of those at the helm. Whether it was turning the death of Diana into a personal PR triumph or brushing off well-founded accusations of corruption surrounding donations from Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone, these people had a feel for the moment.

Contrast that with Starmer choosing to accept gifts, then claiming there was nothing wrong with it then deciding to return £6k’s worth of them anyway.

War crimes

More seriously, do you think Tony Blair could have been entrapped by a radio presenter into explicitly endorsing war crimes? Would any competent government vote to impoverish pensioners to the tune of £1.2 billion and then publicly hand half that sum to a foreign nation the next day?

Would it announce to the world that the country was broke and then jet off to urge military escalation on the Americans?

Before and during the election Labour operated a ‘trust me bro’ approach to policy presentation. Pointing at the sober figure of Starmer it told us to wait and see the fundamental changes he would bring to the country. None were forthcoming during the campaign, and now we find ourselves waiting for Rachel Reeves’ budget to see what we are in for.

All governments end in entropy and chaos. Mistakes are made, scapegoats dismissed, and factions formed around them. It is the nature of the beast.

The trick is to get as much legislation as you can on the books before all of that overwhelms you.

Sue Gray’s departure comes before this government has any achievements to point to. The moment of its optimum potency is passing without reward.

If it doesn’t seize the initiative presently, it won’t be Lord Alli’s clothes the public are worried by, so much as the emperor’s.


Support our Nation today

For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mab Meirion
Mab Meirion
5 days ago

Clark of Kent’s phone box come dressing room has been exposed as a closet full of empty hangers as the latest Emperor stumbles out a manikin in a fashion show…

But the Irish tailor of this ill-fitting outfit gets promoted uber alles…!

Mab Meirion
Mab Meirion
5 days ago

‘Mandy Fly Me’ the Mirror headline in 2000, remember Mr Fill Your Boots has had Clark of Kent’s other ear for years, there is an early connect between him and Morgan Red Beard of Macroom whose poor admin incidentally cost his tank Labour Together a £14 grand fine from the electoral commission..the linked-in generation…!

Last edited 5 days ago by Mab Meirion
Mab Meirion
Mab Meirion
5 days ago
Reply to  Mab Meirion

How far down the river is this latest gang of operators prepared to sell the country to keep this gig, and what else have they promised to the profiteers, poisoners, polluters and despoilers of society to take the keys to Downing Street ?

The Fat Shanks Effect in all its obscenity…

John Ellis
John Ellis
5 days ago

The contrast between Labour’s careful, cautious and ultimately distinctly effective preparation for the Westminster election back on July 4th and the serial missteps which have characterized the party’s early days in government is, at the least, curious!

Annibendod
Annibendod
5 days ago
Reply to  John Ellis

Easier to be in opposition than in government. Their strategy was a simple one – never interfere when your enemy is in the process of destroying himself. Hence their majority on barely a quarter of the eligible vote. Starmer got 9.7 million in 2024 compared to Corbyn’s 12.9 million in 2017. It was the collapse of the Tory vote what won it. There was no plan beyond promising to be competent. No surprise that even that has fallen flat on its face. Just a stop gap government going through the motions with no clue how to fix an utterly broken… Read more »

hdavies15
hdavies15
5 days ago
Reply to  Annibendod

Competent ? They won’t even get there. Check this F.T article out on Reeves’ tip toeing around tackling taxation of high earners in Private Equity where there is the usual opacity between cap gains and income. Rachel Reeves, the UK chancellor, is not expected to hit private equity bosses with the top 45p tax rate in this month’s Budget, as she looks for a compromise deal to close tax “loopholes” that does not drive investors out of Britain. Reeves told the Financial Times ahead of an international investment summit in London next week — to be attended by about 250… Read more »

hdavies15
hdavies15
4 days ago
Reply to  hdavies15

…and reported elsewhere…
…..Rachel Reeves will reportedly abandon plans to reduce tax relief on pensions savings for higher earners because of the impact on public sector workers.

Yet more ring fencing of the top tier. Mustn’t let the riff raff have too much of the elites’ moneys spent on them.

Annibendod
Annibendod
4 days ago
Reply to  hdavies15

Ask them what they stand for. That’s what bothers me. Because they won’t tell you anything of substance. They’ll couch some diplomatic answer in mealy mouthed progressive terms and deliver nothing. I think that they’ve presumed that they’re the good guys and deserve their turn in Govt. Ben is right. The Blair Govt, as much as I loathe the man for his adherence to neoliberalism and for siding with frankly insane neocons, had an idea what they were trying to do. Blair still suffers from a messianic delusion. Starmer is like Welsh Labour on steroids. Uber managed decline.

Padi Phillips
Padi Phillips
4 days ago
Reply to  hdavies15

It’s actually quite simple, as Gary points out…

https://www.facebook.com/reel/8524508020905226

John Ellis
John Ellis
4 days ago
Reply to  Annibendod

That strikes me as a depressingly plausible, if inevitably speculative, analysis of what currently appears to be playing out. Given their Commons majority they’ve got roughly five years to get their house in better order than appears currently to be the case. I hope that they can somehow manage that.

Linda Jones
Linda Jones
5 days ago

It seems to me the Labour Party have lost their moral compass, the promotion and investment in foreign wars while robbing the poorest in the UK of much needed financial help is not a good look. It is also immoral.

So far the Starmer group in Westminster also come across as lacking any real plan for the future of UK. Much like their colleagues in Wales they have promoted themselves well above their level of competence. As they say ,…fail to plan and you plan to fail.

Annibendod
Annibendod
5 days ago
Reply to  Linda Jones

100%. More and more every day falling into poverty. Our communities and culture ravaged by the chosen version of capitalism. Inequality rife. If I can make an analogy – when a referee looses control of a game owing to bad decisions, the risk of conflict breaking out increases significantly. In the same way, ordinary people’s sense of justice is being provoked by unfairnesses, perceived and real. Labour are not turning that around. And if Labour cannot deliver fairness and equality, what the bleep do they exist for?

Last edited 5 days ago by Annibendod
Ap Kenneth
Ap Kenneth
3 days ago

Starmers Just doesn’t have political instinct, the granny tax is such a massive error and yet if they had used the tax system to claw it back from those rich enough to do without, it largely would have been supported.

Our Supporters

All information provided to Nation.Cymru will be handled sensitively and within the boundaries of the Data Protection Act 2018.