Ben Cooper column: ‘You can’t have policy without politics’

The Fabian Society has, over the past three months, been talking politics and policy with people in every corner of England. In our focus groups, they spoke about affording the rent or mortgage, small boats crossing the channel, personal safety, and the quality of new homes. Yet one thing united pretty much every person we spoke to. People felt deeply sceptical that things could get better, or that new policy ideas could change anything.

These focus groups are not unique. Distrust in the government being able to do good things is widespread. Even before the conflict in the Middle East, 57 per cent of people thought the cost-of-living crisis might never end. Just 36 per cent of young people aged between 16 and 29 expect they will be better off than their parents. And, 48 per cent of people thought Labour would make things worse over the next few years. An additional 22 per cent said they would make no real difference. 

These entrenched views are a real problem for the government, and anyone in the Labour Party. Lives have been changed through the Renters’ Rights Act, child poverty reductions, and falling NHS waiting lists. Yet this isn’t cutting through. In some cases, there is a time lag between legislation being passed and people feeling the benefit. But too often, data conflicts with people’s perceptions, and perception wins out. People think that change cannot happen quickly – if at all. The anger and frustration this creates is fuelling the popularity of Reform and the Greens. 

READ MORE:‘We need to confront the future and learn from the past. Tony’s essay did neither’

For those of us who believe in collective solutions to our biggest challenges, we must rebuild a belief that the government can act on our behalf to make Britain better. We have seen the shortcomings of focusing on policy alone as some have called for. Labour can’t defeat populists like Farage and Polanski through policy alone while these perceptions persist. That’s why politics itself matters. There must be a clear political project and purpose. 

In some cases, the barriers to delivery are explicitly both political and based in policy. Barriers to housebuilding need to be tackled further by reform to planning policy. But the NIMBYism that blocks developments requires a political response too. Compulsory sales orders are a policy solution that would help tackle neighbourhood decline by forcing landowners to sell derelict properties. But the perception held by the communities blighted by these properties that they have been ‘left behind’ requires a political solution and narrative to sit alongside such action.

In other cases, the long-term success of policy is dependent upon winning a political argument. Take two policies which have seen very different long-term success: the national minimum wage, and child trust funds. Both were good policies, predicted to transform the lives of millions. But only one survived. 

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

There was a concerted political effort behind the national minimum wage and it was implemented at a time when there were two election victories before the Conservatives took over. The argument was won and the Conservatives went on to keep it – and even raise it significantly. 

But child trust funds didn’t last. The last Labour government didn’t prosecute a compelling argument for them, and didn’t have chance to consolidate the policy, which barely got going before Labour lost in 2010. As a result, no child born after January 2011 benefits. This government needs to learn the lessons from this if it wants to have a lasting legacy.

More fundamentally, every successful agenda for government has politics at its heart. That doesn’t mean an obsessive concern with the polls, the horse race, or personalities. It is about answering the crucial questions who are you governing for?” and ‘who or what are you against?’ 

Attlee favoured ‘practical-minded men and women’ and opposed the ‘hard-faced men’ that ‘felt no responsibility to the nation’. Thatcher favoured the ‘Essex Man’, or skilled manual workers who bought their home through Right to Buy, and opposed socialists. Blair favoured aspirational, upwardly mobile families and opposed the ‘forces of conservatism’. This is about values, but it is also about politics – and in every case, it shaped the policies that they pursued and bound them together with a clear sense of purpose.

No amount of evidence or think tank reports can determine the answer for a government. A focus on good policy and ‘doing the right thing’ isn’t enough. Because when governing inevitably forces a government to choose winners and losers, the answer both guides the decision and helps explain it. If destabilising global events occur, politics provides an anchor. Without this, a government is inevitably buffeted around and forced into u-turns. 

So, who must this government stand for, and who must it stand against? The answer is obvious. With global instability, a turbulent labour market, and an enduring cost of living crisis, the government must stand for the economically insecure – a vast swathe of discontented people, many of whom are currently looking toward other parties. But just as important, the government needs to be clear about who they are against: the ‘rent seekers’ who take out but don’t put in, and those who profit from market failure or exploitative business practices. That is good policy, and good politics.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

In an era of populism and distrust of the political system, it is all too tempting to focus on policy alone. However, good policy cannot be divorced from the fundamental question of politics. The public want to know who Labour stands for, and is against. The government should tell them more often.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected].
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].