January 27, 2025 - 7:00am
In last year’s general election Reform UK won five seats in the House of Commons. That may have been on the back of over four million votes, surpassing Ukip at their high water mark of 2015, but it still left Nigel Farage’s party trailing behind the Liberal Democrats, who triumphed in 72 constituencies.
So it was a compliment to the progress made by Reform since, when Labour’s Wes Streeting declared on Saturday that “the populist Right is coming for us”. Ed Davey led his party to their best result in the modern era last year, but Labour’s eyes are pinned elsewhere.
While Farage was mentioned multiple times during Streeting’s keynote speech to the Fabian Society, as well as during the subsequent Q&A, Kemi Badenoch — who leads the most successful political party in the Western world over the last two centuries — didn’t get a look in. In fact, the only time Streeting did mention the Conservatives was when he said that even Farage was willing to distance himself from Tommy Robinson in a way Badenoch’s party were not.
Take a step back and this all seems absurd. Keir Starmer’s parliamentary majority is bigger than any enjoyed by Margaret Thatcher. And yet, after less than a year in power, a member of cabinet is taking aim at a party whose parliamentary representatives could fit in a London cab.
However, take a look at voter intention and it’s easy to see why. Opinium published a poll over the weekend which showed Labour leading, by a single point, with Reform in second place. That is particularly significant given Opinium has a habit of giving Labour a larger lead than other pollsters. And yet, even here, they could expect to lose more than 150 MPs.
The polling average for this month has Labour on 26%, and Reform and the Conservatives tied on 24%. It’s worth recalling that as recently as last February — less than a year ago — Labour were almost 20 points higher. If the decline of the Tory vote after the 2019 election was historically unprecedented, it could be outdone by Keir Starmer’s party four years from now. By the next election Reform UK could have more MPs than the Tories. That would herald the biggest breakthrough by a new party at Westminster in a century.
In response to those shifts is Labour’s strategy of “deliverism”. It goes something like this: deliver an improved NHS, safer streets and at least marginally higher growth, and Keir Starmer will enjoy a majority again after 2029. Indeed when I spoke on a panel with three Labour MPs at last September’s party conference they seemed to believe such an approach could even lead to a repeat of 2015 — when the party of government (then David Cameron’s Conservatives) not only retained power, but gained MPs.
But less than six months later, that already seems fantastical. The Democrats just tried their own version of “deliverism” — and the Republicans won the popular vote for the first time in 20 years. To make matters worse, things are even harder for Starmer than Harris, whose predecessor Joe Biden at least oversaw a healthy dose of growth. Because if economic stagnation continues over the next four years, then the means to fund improved public services disappears. That is now joined by something few expected last July: a potential debt crisis.
Unfortunately, the Labour establishment still has no answer to this. The only remedy offered by Streeting was the “redistribution of wealth, power and opportunity”, which sounds commendable until it is compared with his party’s actions. Is Blackstone buying the country’s railway arches going to reduce inequality? And will Larry Fink and co, who Starmer gleefully promoted last year, help “redistribute wealth”? Does saying “no” to high speed rail in the North, while saying “yes” to a third Heathrow runway in the South, help with regional inequality?
Reform is not burdened by the experience of government. It has no record to defend. This means that it can become the anti-system party, which voters are clearly finding appealing. Could, then, Farage be the country’s next PM? Streeting responded by saying that we should “not get too carried away by Nigel Farage”, claiming that Reform’s brand was primarily the result of media attention. Which would be a fair point had Streeting himself not just spent an hour mentioning Farage. Labour is clearly feeling threatened — and rightfully so.
Aaron Bastani is the co-founder of Novara Media, and the author of Fully Automated Luxury Communism.
AaronBastani
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAh, the old goal of “redistribution of wealth, power and opportunity” but not the creation of them, which is only achieved by growth in the private sector not its destruction.
Now what was phrase about running out of other people’s money…?
Incidentally the government in 2015 was a Coalition.
No it wasn’t. 2010 delivered a coalition of Tories and Lib Dems, the 2015 election was a majority for Cameron
The wording is “when the party of government…etc”.
The Tories were NOT the party of government at the 2015 election. The government was a Coalition.
The Tories then won the 2015 election because they promised the Referendum.
Correct.
Pedantry of the highest order. Everybody who read the article knew what he was referring to when he referenced the 2015 Tory government
Exactly.
At least two obviously didn’t…don’t confuse accuracy with pedantry.
And no doubt the LibDems would prefer to remember the 2010/15 government as Tory, but it wasn’t.
Sorry, but the Libdems agreed to join the 2010 coalition because an AV referendum was promised, this occurred in May 2011.
Not if the dominant part of your private sector only produces financial Ponzis. The main reason why governments ran out of other people’s money is because deregulated global finance gambled it away and needed trillion dollar bailouts for which everyone is still paying through (asset) inflation.
Governments were more than happy to go along with it because they were getting more in taxes eg stamp duty. In fact Brown lectured Germany that it should have an economy more like the UK’s…
Governments were then happy to print money to save the banks…sorry..”world financial system”…
The real problem started with Nixon closing the gold window…
Quite a feat to write an article like this without mentioning immigration.
Even if Labour can somehow improve the NHS (without taking on the vested interests), make the streets safer (without stop and search or reform of the police and judiciary) and – the biggest ask of all – create growth (without a cheap energy policy and de-regulation), they’re still toast in ’29 if the boats keep coming.
Research indicates it is the topic of immigration that gives Reform its.central appeal so yes, ignoring the elephant in the.room. But.people are becoming increasingly vocal in public on this and many other topics which until very recently would have been taboo or at the very least “bad form”. The overton window is shifting rapidly.
Which makes the article pointless and the author of dubious value to Unherd’s readership
Not really, since it serves as a reminder of the cognitive dissonance at the heart of our political establishment. It’s not as if we particularly need reminding, but it’s still useful to mark the continuing lack of real insight by those in government into how we can escape our current predicaments.
All eyes remain fixed across the pond as an object lesson.
Fundamentally the more left Left just cannot grasp this issue at all. The cognitive dissonance is so great they almost cannot talk about it – the discussion can’t really get beyond the prime directive, inculcated by years of mindless repetition, that any opposition at all is basically racist and therefore evil.
The politics of the last decade and a half can be entirely explained by the public’s desire to dramatically decrease immigration being ignored by politicians.
It partially explains the Labour loss in 2010 (remember poor old Gillian Duffy being called a “bigoted woman” by Gordon Brown on a hot mic for raising the topic). It explains the Tory victory of 2015 due to the promise of an EU referendum (which was a referendum on being able to control our own immigration laws – and thereby reduce numbers). It explains the referendum result. It explains Boris’s landslide. It explains the Tory defenestration in 2024 (when they managed to increase immigration having been hired to kill it). And in due course it will explain the Labour defeat and Reform victory.
Of course it also explains Trump 45 and 47, Meloni, Le Pen, AFD, etc etc.
It amazes me that politicians and journalists can’t see this and come up with other quaint theories which better suit their prejudices.
Labour are spending 22 billion on burying gas in the ground.
Are people starting to realise the cost of Milliband’s Net Zero goals?
Perhaps not yet, but in a couple of years, I think people will see that Net Zero is a mistake.
Hoping for a series of blackouts which will force the NZ reckoning sooner and reassert the importance of the analog world. If it puts pay to diigital ID (as distinct from physical ID which I favour) and CBDCs, then I would see.l that as a strike for freedom against ongoing government over reach.
Net Zero is a mistake
A mistake?! That has to be the understatement of the century so far.
It is more about the implementation which is governed by a set of arbitrary dates with no clear plan. EV’s nothing yet about inequalities of charging rates for those unable to charge at home and a dependencies on windmills which at best are intermittent.
More anti-Tommy Robinson spin from Streeting and dutifully repeated by Unherd.
Free Tommy Robinson.
Well done Unherd. Distance yourself from the man who has been calling out the biggest scandal of our times and is in jail for it.
Rag.
LDs are no threat to Lab- they have a friendlish stand off whereby LDs are given a free hit at Southern Tory rural/nice towns and Lab get most of the Urban overspill seats.
Problem for Labour is 4 fold.
1-2million Tory stay at homes come out to vote for them next time.
Whether the Green StoneWall Antidemetic Pro Gazans can attract enough Luxury Belief Lefties to their causes.
Celtic Nationalists get their act together.
Reform move somewhat left on economics.
1 and 4 do most damage – in fact Labour go back down to mid-200 seats in that sceario.
This seems the key point. I’m not convinced that Reform (at least for now) are anything other than a vehicle for voters to take a free hit at ‘the establishment’ from a cosy position of having no record to defend. They are doing that very well of course, but it does feel very insubstantial and a bit all things to all people in the best traditions of the LDP.
Certainly the Reform 2024 manifesto was really underwhelming. That document ducked so many big issues.
The real issue is that both of the traditional main parties look to have problems that may yet be fatal. The Conservatives aren’t getting over the Boriswave for at least a decade. As you say, Labour has problems on all sides and it won’t take a lot for them to move to the territory where they are just a lightening rod for discontent (fair or not). Two party politics is breaking down. Probably a split of both parties would be more reflective of the country.
The only thing that I would add to your comment is that now the non-voter figure is something in the order of 40%. If Reform start getting those people to vote for them, then 100+ seats is rather less than theoretical.
Now I do also think that some people who are gung ho about pulling down both Labour and Conservatives may want to just be a bit careful what it is they wish for. The place in Europe where voters (at national level) decided to really pull down the traditional parties was France – out of that void stepped Macron and the centrists’ revenge.
One thing that would be a game-changer is PR. Whilst PR does have real downsides, and is not the silver bullet some people think it is, in a multi-party politics it’s got to at least be considered. And 20 years ago I never would have believed I’d be sitting here saying that.
Thank you for pointing out one thing missing from the various pieces on the last election and Reform, namely the low turnout caused by 2019 Tory voters who stayed at home. I suspect they won’t try that form of protest again, but not sure who will get their vote in what proportions.
At the next GE Reform will gain votes from multiple sources, including ex-Tories, Labour and non-voters at the last GE.
Obviously the same was true in 2019 where turnout was down on 2017 mostly caused by Lab stay at homes on that occasion. Corbyn too toxic and rowed back on EU Ref outcome- ‘Red Kippers’ who voted Leave stuck with Lab in 2017. Not so 2019.
Seven MPs are expected to be desperate to have back the Whip of the party that is in third place in the polls, behind a party with no policies, and with both of them behind one of the two parties and three caucuses to have five MPs each, one in 130. Apart from Tony Blair, any other Labour Leader this century would already have been removed for having taken the party to third place at all, never mind behind the latest vehicle for Nigel Farage. Including Blair, none of them ever did.
Farage and Kemi Badenoch are both trying to present themselves as the franchisees of Donald Trump, who in turn praises the “very good job” that is being done by Keir Starmer. That sentence really does have something for everyone. Watch out for people who said “Gulf of America” for the Gulf of Cuba, as the Conservatives and Reform UK both will. But watch out even more for anyone who supported the military interventions of which the first looks sets to be in Colombia. That will be all three of them. And for what? Denmark has been a member of NATO since day one, it has been part of almost every American-led war in that period, it is the base for the NSA’s spying on European leaders, it was crucial to the Nord Stream lies, it always buys American rather than European military equipment, and its hosts the Pituffik Space Base, which used to be the Thule Air Base. Guess where? Yet Trump still wants to annex 98 per cent of Danish territory.
If there is a Gulf of America, then it is the Persian Gulf, where Richard Tice and Isabel Oakeshott have sought asylum. Specifically, they have done so in the United Arab Emirates. But although it is now considered one of the “moderates” in the Middle East, only last year the Statute Law was changed on a cross-party basis to stop the UAE from acquiring two small-circulation newspapers and a tiny-circulation magazine. Apparently, these things are now the Government’s business. If you thought that there was now a Labour Government, then ask yourself why it would care in the least who owned the Telegraph, for which Tice writes fairly regularly, for which Oakeshott writes several times per week (now from the Emirates), and which is still always described as “influential”. Influential over whom?
Although they are never going to satisfy people whose minds were made up, Trump may have declassified the files relating to the assassinations of the Kennedys and of Martin Luther King, but he is no more going to antagonise the Saudis by releasing the 9/11 files than he is going to antagonise the Israelis by releasing the files about the USS Liberty. The first, second and third parties in the British polls, all of which opposed a ceasefire in Gaza, now all support Trump’s proposal to clear its population to Jordan and Egypt in order to settle Gaza with Israelis. If you doubt that Reform or the Conservatives think that, then ask them. If you doubt that Labour does, then ask Trump.
Trump has now pardoned the 23 peaceful pro-lifers, but only after the J6 rioters and Ross Ulbricht. There is no sign of his pardoning Julian Assange. Still, by declaring that biological sex was fixed from conception, Trump has caused a section of feminism to admit that each and every one of us was a distinct human organism from that point. One could hardly have a Y chromosome and be part of one’s mother’s body. And by turning his guns on DEI, a move welcomed by Liz Truss, he is making a complete fool of her, since she was an A-list candidate whose constituency association was threatened with an all-women shortlist if it failed to select her. This kind of thing did not begin with David Cameron. By 1970, even Ted Heath had had to promise that there would be one woman in his Cabinet, and there was simply only one credible candidate, Margaret Thatcher. The spycops scandal under her and numerous others is about to get the ITV treatment that I have been advocating for a year. Thanks to RedBird IMI, which owns All3Media, but which is apparently unfit to pay Oakeshott in Dubai.
Labour shouldn’t be complacent and won’t be. But it’s the Tories who should be more worried. Or perhaps the Right per se as a lovely split in it’s egos, twaddle and policy dishonesty v helpful.
Moment Reform appear more than a protest vote their actual policy agenda will come under real scrutiny. Farage favours a Singapore-on-Thames economic model. Unfortunately for him vast majority of Reforms working class constituent won’t. It’s the classic Right wing conundrum- weaponise immigration for electoral gain but then find those drawn by that detest much of the rest of the prospectus. One is about to see that come home to roost in the US.
Alignment with Trump also serious jeopardy for Reform and Tories. Brits don’t like him or his Tech Bro Oligarchs. And we’re at ‘peak’ Trump now. Wait til the slide and behaviour further deteriorates.
Starmer’s resilience may yet be a ‘grower’ with the electorate and plenty of time yet.
After a disastrous first six months it is going to an uphill struggle to regain credibility. They are starting from a low base of only 32% of those who bothered to vote.
Wishful thinking again, JW.
Starmer won’t stop the boats, which means that the situation in our provincial towns will be much worse by ’29 than it is now. There will be a lot more random violence. Other forms of crime will flourish. Trump’s cheap energy, de-regulated and AI driven economy will suck investment out of the UK and Europe. Meanwhile the terminally stupid net zero nonsense will kill thousands of old people whilst having no impact whatsoever on ‘climate change’. The NHS will get worse because Labour don’t have the b@lls to challenge the vested interests, just as they don’t have the b@lls to challenge the suburban middle class which is still accumulating trillions in unearned property wealth while the productive economy crumbles around them. Whatever else happens in 2029 one thing is sure: the Labour Party will be wiped out.
This is not speculation. Watch and learn.
Skirts round the fundamental point, which those who make up what remains of ‘the left’ are unable to grasp by temperament and intellect. Its core beliefs and mission have been discredited or abandoned and It no longer aspires to equality for all, or rights for workers, or any other aim that benefits a majority of people. New parties like Reform now are picking up parts of this abandoned landmass. All Labour has left is a legacy package of confused and often repellent ideas sold to the gullible by the power-hungry and unscrupulous. Ultimately, this can now only destroy it. This is because – as Starmer is doing – its legacy ideas in practice involve the delivery of a horrendous package of legalistic, anti-democratic, corporatist, elitist, anti-individual, anti-freedom, anti- human, authoritarian pseudo-paternalism and failure. That will always be rejected when ordinary people have the chance.
Labour’s absolute high water mark was 33.7% at the GE. All parties fall away from their high point, even good competent ones. This lot are an amateur shambles, and they know it themselves.
I’d guess at over 100,000 jobs at least lost in the next year. Money and companies are running for the hills, ( or abroad), jobs will keep disappearing and a debt crisis is certain.
And, then there are the boats. They will increase by the month, as ” friend” Starmer is there.
Only Reform are even interested in trying to stop them.
I think it’s more than just policies for Labour now.
I think one of things hurting Starmer & Co is audible.
I know this isn’t very scientific, but bear with me. if you forget what’s being said, and just listen to the voices. Actually listen to them. Farage sounds statesman like. Even Kemi sounds authoritative. Starmer sounds…. nothing short of boring. If we lived in an age of radio, Starmer would never have got to the position he’s in now.
In short, the more we hear Starmer, the more he suffers by comparison.