We are doomed if Labour wins a supermajority – buyer’s remorse will set in immediately
There is no doubt that we’re heading for a Labour win. The only question is how big and for how long. If the polls are right and Labour is heading for a majority of more than 200, then we are doomed – any opposition, both from within the party and across the bench, will be rendered useless. And while the Tories will be busy licking their wounds after July 4, the country will finally turn its attention to what a Starmer-led government truly means for Britain.
I predict buyer’s remorse setting in almost immediately. Yet we will have to face handing an unshakeable majority to a Houdini government for the next five years. Because that is exactly what it will be – a government elected on the back of overwhelming anti-Tory sentiment and a vague manifesto stuffed with empty platitudes. That is simply not right.
How can a party set to win one of the biggest majorities in history run on such an ambiguous platform?
Take taxes, for example. What are Labour’s plans? It’s already ruled out raising income tax, national insurance or VAT. But the money has to come from somewhere. Its published fiscal plan is unconvincing.
At best, it’s just a long list of random numbers put together by crude guesswork and wishful thinking.
So what happens if Sir Keir Starmer misses his tax revenue targets (a very likely outcome)? Who will fill in the gap?
The answer, ladies and gentlemen, is you and me. We are the back-up plan. Taxes will almost certainly increase.
But, of course, no sane party on the cusp of gaining power would openly admit that. So the Labour Party has instead relied on underhanded tactics and covert language to mask the fact that they are, in fact, planning on raiding your pockets. Starmer’s admission last week that he doesn’t regard those with savings as “working people” was one such giveaway.
Moreover, the lack of specificity around other tax rises demonstrates that the stage is being set for a new narrative. Shadow Cabinet minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, in a recent interview, even said that the party has “always been open about the fact that they may open the books and discover that the situation is even worse than it is at the moment”.
Really? Wouldn’t that be convenient? Unfortunately for Mr Symonds, that excuse simply won’t wash. The dire state of Britain’s finances has been public knowledge for some time.
The truth is that Labour will find itself in the same difficult financial situation that the Tories have found themselves in for years – a problem worsened by the near-total absence of any real economic growth. And no amount of creative gibberish will mask that fact.
It’s why, after so many bold promises, Labour’s manifesto has scant detail concerning the ticking time bomb that is social care. No wonder the King’s Fund, a social care charity, says it “largely dodges” real reform.
Once the party is far enough from the actionable scrutiny of the electorate, it will set about the real agenda that leaves it free from any accountability.
Take, too, the issue of women’s rights. What really is Labour’s stance? For years, the party has accommodated every far-left folly on the issue, from radical gender ideology to ferociously anti-women lunacy.
What can women expect of Labour when its own leader is so inconsistent on the matter? Starmer previously repeatedly stated his support for self-ID for trans-identifying people. Now, he runs away from the issue like a bat out of hell. One minute, he says it “shouldn’t be said” that only women have a cervix, the next he agrees with fellow MP Rosie Duffield and concedes that “biologically”, she is right.
How can he be trusted?
Perhaps most importantly: What does Starmer even stand for? He’s a proclaimed socialist human rights lawyer who backed Corbyn as prime minister, worked to reverse Brexit and even encouraged EU leaders to undermine Brexit.
He bent the knee at the height of the Black Lives Matter movement and U-turned on his bizarre proclamations that biology doesn’t exist for “women” with testicles. Where would someone like that end up leading the country?
I am entirely sympathetic to the anger against the Conservatives. I don’t believe incompetence and chaos should be rewarded with votes.
But there is a very real possibility that the country will give Starmer’s Labour the opportunity to govern without sufficient scrutiny of its policies. And we will all be worse off for it.
