Five signals that will show whether Labour is really governing in a different way

Two months into the new Labour’s administration and Keir Starmer has done the easy bit. The prime minister has rolled out plans for immediate policy changes prepared pre-election, stepped into Rishi Sunak’s vacated foreign policy engagements, and applied sticking-plasters to the worst inherited crises – such as public sector pay and prison capacity – before such problems can be remotely attributable to the new government. The riots that followed the horrific Southport stabbings were an unexpected challenge, but the government’s rapid response was drawn directly from a playbook which Keir Starmer had been closely involved in developing in 2011.

As parliament returns after the short summer recess, the Labour leadership knows that this autumn presents a unique moment. The government has a new electoral mandate based on a firmly established public narrative about the failures of the Conservatives. The official opposition is focused on its internal battles and the many new MPs of other opposition parties are still on a learning curve at Westminster. And Labour has a massive majority in a parliament in which over half of MPs have been elected for the first time – with its own backbenchers the least experienced at rebellion and most loyal they will ever be.  

The decisions facing the new Labour government this autumn will shape the trajectory of the entire parliament. The question now is just how bold Keir Starmer and chancellor Rachel Reeves are willing to be with the political space created by this rare combination of circumstances. This autumn there will be five major signals of whether Labour is really going to do government differently.  

Will public service sticking plasters be underpinned with longer-term reform?

Labour has concluded that the scale of the crisis in public services is such that increases in taxation and cuts in state provision are necessary to allow the provision of long-term life support rather than simply sticking plasters. After the pre-planned early days of government, now comes the hard bit – deciding how to use the October 30 budget to create the fiscal space Labour needs to fund its new policies and making final choices about what to do with that space.  

Starmer and Reeves have been firmly signalling that the budget will be painful – many voters will find themselves paying more, and receiving less than they anticipated the state would provide. But Labour will need to be clear what that pain is for. If it is to shift the dial on public services, so that the experience of voters is materially different by the next election, then Starmer and Reeves will need to be ambitious with both reform and investment.  

How will the government respond to challenge and scrutiny?

When it becomes clear who will lose out, their objections emerge. Will Starmer and his team have the confidence to stick to his plans? For the time being, most of the reaction and response to Labour’s policy proposals will be channelled through the media. But by the end of the autumn a new leader of the opposition will be in place and parliamentary select committees up and running. Only then will we be able to see how the Labour government approaches internal and external challenge. Will Starmer take the Johnsonian attitude that a government with a large majority can simply push through controversial measures? Will he take a Sunakian approach and step back if Labour MPs raise concerns about government proposals. Or will he find the sweet spot of sticking to his strategic objectives while taking on board constructive challenge that improves the chances of his policies succeeding?

Will government be set up to make and sustain strategic choices?

The new government’s ability to make and stick to difficult choices will depend not just upon the metal of individuals but on how it sets up the centre of government. The creation of a quad of Starmer, Reeves, deputy prime minister Angela Rayner and Pat McFadden, chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, operating as a core cabinet – as recommended in the Institute’s Centre Commission – is a positive step, as is McFadden’s emerging role driving delivery from the centre. Noises-off from the centre about conflict within Starmer’s core team are less confidence-inspiring.  

Pre-election there were indications that Labour was considering necessary moves to clarify the role of the Cabinet Office and its relationship with No.10 and the Treasury. The departure of Simon Case provides an opportunity to split the unmanageable role of cabinet secretary and create a separate head of the civil service who would then be able to focus on overdue reforms that would significantly increase the chances of Labour’s policy programme succeeding. This would free up the new cabinet secretary to focus on supporting the prime minister to deliver his priorities.  

Will the centre adapt to mission-led government?

As yet there is a lack of clarity about exactly how the centre of government will operate to deliver the missions-based approach Labour made so much of in opposition. In what ways will mission-boards differ from normal cabinet committees? How will missions-architecture be set up to drive genuine cross-government working and ensure strategic objectives drive financial decisions rather than the other way around?  

The first big test of this new ‘mission-led government’ will be the three-year spending review due in March 2025, with the centre needing to articulate a clear set of priorities for government and  those priorities being used by the Cabinet Office and the Treasury to jointly drive the spending review process. The risks to be avoided include those priorities being too vague – so departments can define anything they want to do as delivering one of the five missions – and weak mission leadership failing to drive the genuine culture of cross-departmental working that will be necessary to make a reality of Labour’s desired new mission-led approach.  

Will Labour get back on the front foot on ethics?

After a promising start – Starmer articulated the importance of ministerial standards and the role of the prime minister’s adviser, while Lucy Powell addressed the issue of MPs’ outside earnings – Labour’s positive stance on rebuilding public trust in politics has been set back over the summer by allegations of cronyism linked to unforced errors over civil service appointments.  

Starmer has been clear he believes that public trust in government can only be rebuilt through a combination of government delivery and robust enforcement of the rules. It is clear his government is focused on the former, but, if his valuable reputation for ethical steel is not to erode, he needs to grip the latter too. The centre needs to review all the senior appointment processes currently under way and ensure all future ones adhere to the rules – amending the terms of controversial appointments that have already taken place where there are grounds to do so (as has already happened in the case of Ian Corfield). Timely publication of Starmer’s first ministerial code, confirmation that the prime minister’s adviser can undertake his own investigations and progress in establishing the promised Ethics and Integrity Commission are further steps that would help Labour get back on the front foot on ethics.

Although the Labour government has been in place for two calendar months, the timing of the election and the summer recess mean that in reality it is still in its early weeks. September sittings are often relatively inconsequential, but for the new government the next two weeks will be an important prelude to a crucial autumn in which we will begin to see the reality of how it intends to govern.