The King’s Speech was overshadowed by the Westminster clown show
Put the current political chaos from your mind for a moment and imagine that Keir Starmer wasn’t under threat. Imagine a version of the Prime Minister – still unpopular and still struggling to engineer economic growth – but at least with the full backing of his cabinet and MPs.
Under such circumstances, yesterday’s King’s Speech would have been a hugely significant moment. It would have been an opportunity for the government, approaching its half way mark, to reinvigorate itself and recalibrate its agenda in light of a disappointing economic record and in response to a gathering financial storm.
And with those two tests having been set, it would have failed them both.
So ignore the prospect of an imminent challenge to Starmer’s leadership, and consider instead what Labour’s policy agenda reveals about the state of the party. I’m afraid even a charitable interpretation was that the draft Bills amounted to a case of the good, the bad and the ugly.
A proposed Nuclear Regulation Bill aims to streamline the planning process for new nuclear energy projects. A Competition Reform Bill will speed up reviews by the competition watchdog. Other Bills are designed to support airport expansion, promote innovation in financial services and strengthen cyber security.
Then we get to the bad bits. Votes at 16, new taxes on electricity generators, a formal ban on North Sea exploration, a tax on domestic tourism, Digital ID schemes and the dilution of jury trials will all be pushed in the next legislative session.
From the party that promised to ‘end the chaos’
As for the ugly, how about the glaring lack of a Welfare Reform Bill? Or a Defence Investment Bill? Nothing. On two of the biggest public policy issues facing the country, the government sits on its hands. Despite some welcome developments on infrastructure and planning, the King’s Speech was thin gruel.
Starmer described it as a “radical agenda to tear down the status quo” but Tory leader Kemi Badenoch was more on the money when she dismissed it as a series of measures that “do not remotely come close to what the country needs.”
Of course, the fact that the Prime Minister is so painfully wounded means that even if he stays this agenda is likely to be hijacked by the various factions now competing for control of his party. What’s left is an inadequate set of policy responses further undermined by the political chaos of party in-fighting.
It’s a deeply unedifying state of affairs from a party that promised to “end the chaos.”