When Keir Starmer appeared on BBC Radio 5 Live on Friday morning, he appeared to let the cat out the bag. The Labour leader suggested he would scrap the pension lump sum allowance if he wins next week: “We’re not going to renew it.”
Tory politicians couldn’t believe their luck – finally some ammunition for their claim that Labour was not straight in its manifesto over their tax and spend plans.
Only, Labour aides quickly intervened to explain it was simply “an old-fashioned mistake” and Starmer had misspoken. Part of the reason it was seized on is that Starmer (along with Sunak) is already accused by the Institute for Fiscal Studies of a “conspiracy of silence” where both parties are not being upfront with the public about the difficult decisions on the economy. Clearly this is more of a pressing matter for the man who all pollsters expect to be in 10 Downing Street by this time next week.
But increasingly the talk in Labour circles isn’t just about what Starmer might do on tax if the sums don’t add up. Instead, it’s over what Starmer might be temped to do if he does – as the current polls suggest – win a big majority.
Labour’s election manifesto was a purposefully cautious document, on the grounds that they did not want to frighten the horses or risk setting targets they will miss. It means, for instance, that a Starmer government promises a 0.3 per cent increase in teaching numbers per year – roughly a third of a teacher per school. Big talk on reform has not been matched with specifics.
So, if Starmer finds himself with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to change the country, will he be tempted to go a little further – to do some things that he may never get the chance to do again? While a landslide win would point to a likely decade in power, it’s hard to see the majority growing larger even if the Tories struggle in opposition. As one Labour candidate puts it: “We could be about to have a unique chance to do some radical things. It would be mad not to seize it.”
And what might Starmer want to do? This is the question being whispered in the party and few think the answer is what the Tories suggest: create a one-party socialist state.
Instead, the obvious landing space is things absent from the manifesto that have not been explicitly ruled out. Going back on a “triple lock” manifesto pledge not to raise income tax, for instance, would be viewed as breaking a promise. But adding in new policies and plans is less problematic.
First, press regulation. When Keir Starmer was director of public prosecutions he brought prosecutions against more than 20 journalists, including phone-hacking charges against senior News UK journalists.
Starmer was later accused of abandoning long-held views and Labour’s cause of press reform when his party walked back from talk that they would oppose government plans to scrap Section 40 – a legal mechanism from the Leveson report that would force publishers to accept state-backed regulation or have to pay the legal costs of both sides in any complaints no matter the result.
At the time, Labour critics said Starmer was trying to avoid the pre-election monstering that Neil Kinnock received before his shock loss in 1992. Given the Labour leader has been courting various newspaper and magazine endorsements of late (this week The Economist backed Labour for the first time since Blair was leader), it’s fair to conclude that talking about clamping down on the press would be the opposite of an aphrodisiac for Fleet Street.
There is no proper mention of it in the manifesto. But it’s not a subject that particularly animates voters. The question is whether an unassailable majority means Starmer is tempted to revisit the topic in some form.
Next up, ID cards. Plenty of Labour figures will tell you this is a non-starter. Seasoned Labour politicians shudder when they think back to the Blair years when the plan faced strong opposition and warnings of a coming Big Brother state. In the end, Gordon Brown put it on ice – before it was scrapped by the Tory-Lib Dem coalition. Once again, however, Blair is pushing the idea, along with David Blunkett and William Hague.
Given the Tony Blair Institute is likely to be an active force in the likely coming Labour government, expect it to be pushed. Those backing it see it as a potential answer to curbing illegal immigration as it would mean closer checks on the numbers here and more barriers to entering UK society.
Would it happen? As one Labour candidate puts it: “If we can’t reduce illegal immigration in other ways, it may be where they end up.”
Finally, there’s the EU. As Keir Starmer made clear in Wednesday’s final head-to-head debate of the campaign, he has no plans to cut a deal on immigration to improve trading relations. In other words, even the most Remain-supporting members of the Shadow Cabinet will privately say that rejoining the single market is toxic.
But Labour figures are less scared of an electoral backlash on trade. Starmer has said he would never consider rejoining the customs union – but this could be a case of semantics. Given Labour politicians are less exercised than Tory MPs on trade deals or divergence, some form of customs union – whatever you want to call it – could be seen as a way to boost trade.
Barring no big polling upset, Starmer will be prime minister by this time next week. It’s once he’s in 10 Downing Street that the surprises could begin.
Katy Balls is political editor at The Spectator