Labour’s Plan for Change: what does it mean?

In the run-up to the 2024 election, Labour kept their offering a closely-guarded secret, with the public and commentators unsure of what Starmer’s policies or principles were.

With the election result predicted correctly for many months due to the Conservatives’ disastrous record, Labour appeared to rely on a message of ‘at least we’re not the Tories’ with little else to encourage us to go out and vote for them.

So after Labour came to power many hoped that they would tell us what they were all about and what they were going to do to fix the innumerable problems they had highlighted in the previous government’s running of the country.

It took them five months, but at last we have a plan, a Plan for Change.

The six milestones have been described differently in various media, but this is what Keir Starmer said in his speech, before further spin could be added:

1. Higher living standards in every region of the country
2. Britain rebuilt with 1.5 million new homes
3. Safer Streets
4. The best start in life for every child
5. Clean power by 2030
6. Waiting lists in our NHS cut

Sounds good, all positive things for the country. But what does each one actually mean, and are they achievable?

One of the journalists present asked if the public might be confused by the “foundations, missions, steps, milestones” mentioned in the accompanying literature and over the last few years. While the mainstream media might like to think the public are a bit dim, it’s also possible they might be turned off by the never-ending stream of broken pledges from Labour press office.

So let’s take a look at these six milestones in detail. They’re supposed to be the guide for what this government should achieve during this parliament, although at least one of them extends to 2030 so there might be a handy get-out for those milestones that aren’t met. Either way, we will be scrutinising Labour’s record on these (and the many other) pledges Keir Starmer has made.

“Raising living standards in every part of the United Kingdom, so working people have more money in their pocket as we aim to deliver the highest sustained growth in the G7, with higher Real Household Disposable Income per person and GDP per capita by the end of the Parliament.”

We all want a pay rise, but this mission may not deliver even if it succeeds. In the Q&A, ITV’s Robert Peston pointed out: “There’s actually never been a parliament in modern times when RHDI didn’t rise. It rose the lowest on record in the last parliament, and it’s currently forecast, by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), to rise the second lowest on record in this parliament”.

This was interrogated again by Gary Gibbon from Channel4: “it went up by 0.3% in the last parliament, and it’s projected by the OBR to go up by 0.5% in your government. Do you give yourself a pass mark if it is 0.5%?”

As for GDP per capita, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicted in October 2022 that this metric would increase year-on-year up to at least 2027.

So it looks like Labour’s got this one covered unless something catastrophic happens to the economy before 2029. The two measures adopted by Labour, RHDI and GDP per capita, are subject not only to the effects of government actions, but the movement of international markets and the performance of entire sectors outside of political control. So Starmer can’t claim much credit for this foregone conclusion, not that a 0.5% increase in disposable income is anything to shout about.

“Rebuilding Britain with 1.5 million homes in England and fast-tracking planning decisions on at least 150 major economic infrastructure projects.”

That’s 1.5 million net new homes (I checked), so it takes account of any demolitions and gives a meaningful addition of 1.5 million dwellings. Labour also say they will “Work in partnership with local leaders, housebuilders and infrastructure developers” – who will want to maximise their returns and have admitted to withholding housing supply in order to increase profits.

Planning reform may help get new projects approved, but if developers aren’t submitting any plans then it makes no difference. Labour is expecting the private sector to deliver most of the 370,000 new homes per year, with just £500m of public money added to the Affordable Homes Programme.

The relaxation of the rules on building on the Green Belt will free up some land for development, but again it relies on that land being profitable to develop. As we trudge through this period of economic stagnation, landowners may be unwilling to sell or develop land until it becomes more profitable, putting building on hold.

And if that wasn’t enough, the construction industry may not even have enough people to build the homes. Not enough new tradespeople are being trained, and it’s no longer as easy to recruit from overseas. But who knows, maybe this is the great opportunity we’ve been waiting for to solve the unemployment and housing crises in one go.

“Putting police back on the beat with a named officer for every neighbourhood, and 13,000 additional officers, PCSOs and special constables in neighbourhood roles in England and Wales.”

Trust in UK police has taken a real hit in recent years, with individual officers and whole forces embroiled in toxic scandals, and the perception that the police lack the resources to respond to reports of crime. Media reports exaggerating the levels of violent crime have not helped, but there is also an accompanying narrative on social media that reinforces the perception that the streets are dangerous.

But would having a visible police presence actually change anything? Policing, crime, and society have all changed since the days when we expected to see bobbies on the beat, and maybe Labour are pitching to a certain audience that remember those days. Perhaps those 13,000 new employees could be more effectively deployed elsewhere?

Channel4 Fact Check has also revealed that an extra 13,000 police recruits works out as a net decrease in officer numbers because population growth will outpace recruitment levels. After 14 years of austerity cuts and an existing recruitment and retention crisis, it’s clear that investment is needed if Labour are serious about boosting police numbers.

“Giving children the best start in life, with a record 75% of five-year-olds in England ready to learn when they start school.”

This is something that’s not been as well covered in the media as the other milestones, although it is something that’s come up in discussions about the effects of pandemic lockdowns on schoolchildren.

But it’s not just Covid-19 that’s affected children’s progress. 30% of UK children live in poverty, a problem exacerbated by insecure work and housing, where parents have no choice but to take on zero-hours contracts and unaffordable private rental properties. 69% of children in poverty live in working households.

Added to this is the problem of finding childcare for pre-school age children. Some families have to choose between work and childcare, where nursery costs are higher than one parent’s salary. Others struggle to find childcare at all, which then prevents them from working.

The pressure on all young families, even the better-off ones, is high. Raising a child to be ready for school isn’t just about teaching them the right skills, but also socialisation. Families with little time to interact with their children, and those unable to find a pre-school place, are missing out on vital interactions.

Labour used to talk a lot about the value of SureStart centres, but mostly in the context of the Conservatives removing their funding. Now they say they will launch Family Hubs, which sound a lot like the original SureStart (why can’t they just call it the same thing?).

It will probably help to undo some of the decline in children’s development and living standards, but only time will tell if it is a success. What is perhaps concerning is the lack of news on the implementation of Family Hubs since the budget announcement of £69 million towards their delivery.

“Securing home-grown energy, protecting billpayers, and putting us on track to at least 95% Clean Power by 2030, while accelerating the UK to net zero.”

Pretty much all of the questions from journalists at the Plan launch focussed on the 95% figure, when previously Labour had said it would be 100% by 2030. But does this actually matter? And are Labour’s plans enough / achievable?

We might consider that some industries rely on fossil fuels in ways that we don’t typically think about, e.g. in agriculture and chemical manufacture, or that some other industries aren’t prepared to completely decarbonise by the 2030 deadline. We might view these and other examples as reasonable exceptions if we look into the reasons why.

However, one aspect of the 95% ‘clean’ energy figure that wasn’t picked up on is that it includes nuclear power, a technology that many would not consider very clean at all. Also, while there is some state investment, Labour is relying on the private sector to stump up the majority of the investment in British renewables.

We haven’t forgotten the £28 billion green transition pledge that was dropped before the election, apparently in an effort to appear ‘responsible’. But it is worth looking at what Labour is investing in:

• £3.9 billion for Carbon Capture
• £125 million for Great British Energy
• £2.7 billion for Sizewell C
• £1 billion to the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme
• £3.4 billion for the Warm Homes Plan
• £163 million to the Industrial Energy Transformation Fund
• £200 million to accelerate EV chargepoint rollout
• £120 million to support the purchase of new electric vans and to support the manufacture of wheelchair accessible EVs
• £5 billion towards a more productive and environmentally sustainable agricultural sector
• £400 million of support for tree planting and peatland
• £2.4 billion for flood defences

“Ending hospital backlogs to meet the NHS standard of 92% of patients in England waiting no longer than 18 weeks for elective treatment.”

Like much of the funding for the other milestones, Labour are expected to look to the private sector for the promised investment and reforms needed to fix the problems in the health service. This could cover everything from capital investment to technological innovations.

Labour have already devoted £26 billion in the Autumn budget to making a start on getting the waiting lists down, but their overall strategy for the next five years involves:

• The NHS being there when people need it (timely access to GP & hospital appointments, earlier diagnoses, and shorter waiting times)
• Reducing early deaths from the biggest causes (including cancer, cardiovascular disease and stroke, and suicide)
• Increasing healthy life expectancy (a big part of this is about reducing sick days and retirement for health reasons)

To achieve this, Labour are planning three major policy shifts that they will expand on in early 2025, in their 10-Year Health Plan:

1. Moving care from hospital to community
2. Going from analogue to digital
3. Shifting the focus from treatment to prevention

Is that £26 billion enough to fix the problems? It will take some time for any effects to become visible. What people seem to be most concerned about is getting GP appointments and elective treatments – so shorter waits and less hassle are what we would expect to see if it’s working.

Mission Impossible?

Not necessarily. Labour are outwardly promising modest reforms while directing funding towards initiatives that sound like they could make a real difference. The trouble with this strategy is two-fold, though.

1. We don’t know if what is promised is enough to fix the nation’s many problems, or if it will work how the government says it will;
2. The doubts about Keir Starmer and Labour’s abilities / staying power will just be fuelled by these half-arsed policies designed to not spook or offend the mainstream media or the markets. The aversion to anything brave or bold means that almost 6 months after his election, the only memorable thing about Keir Starmer is that his dad was a toolmaker.

Look, if the government are successful in all these missions, it will benefit Britain hugely. It will take us some way towards getting things actually working again, but it won’t fix everything. Of course, if Labour also deliver on the previous pledges, foundations, steps and milestones, then we’ll be getting somewhere.

Reading through the Plan for Change and the Autumn budget, it’s clear that Labour are planning on revising their offer periodically by outlining broad concepts early on and filling in the details over time. It’s not a bad idea, given that circumstances and needs can change, and the closer you get to implementing a policy, the more you know. But there’s still the possibility these missions will go the way of Keir’s 10 pledges as just more broken promises.

Labour speak of ten-year strategies in both the aforementioned documents, and they will have to win a second term to ensure their plans are fulfilled. But they must make more of an impact if they want to inspire the voting public to give them another chance in five years.

---

Sign up to The Meteor mailing list – click here

The Meteor is a media co-operative on a mission to democratise the media in Manchester. To find out more – click here

Featured image: composite image