It could be easy to view the Labour "landslide" as a solidly gained victory, but the statistics beneath tell a different story
The Tories are a spent force
But don't get too comfortable
Yup. The Conservatives, and the recent self-interested corruption that followed them around the last 10 years are finally gone from UK government, at least for now. Superficially this is a great result for the country. Anything (well anything aside from a Reform majority - providence forfend) would have been preferable to continued Tory tenure. Labout's tagline was simple: "Change". Hopefully it will prove to be change for the btter. It's not a given, though. I'm not a Labour supporter, especially the fluid modern Labour movement which seems to drift with the currents of popularity and doesn't seem to hold to principles so much as anchor-points in public opinion. I'm hopeful that they will bring something new, that is infused with hope and compassion not fear and greed, and workable, and sustainable. So, yes, superficially a fine result.
Let's not get complacent about this. It's a quirk of FPTP. The subtext of the stats is that Labour didn't so much gain a victory, as the Tories lost one. If Reform hadn't been there to split the vote, things might have been different. In some seats the vote fleeing the Tories scattered equally among the other options, but in some it was very definitely either a migration to the LibDems or to Reform.
What concerns me is that if the Tories truly crumble, Labour having sidled toward the middle, the vacuum will be filled by Reform and British politics will be dragged further and further rightward. (We've already had gibberings about boats and borders from Labour, even post-result. )
This is a welcome reprieve, but it may be all too brief. As some pundits have been saying, Labour now have a lot of expectations to live up to, even ones that actually go counter to what they committed to in their manifesto. Labour never committed to increased public spending despite fluffy words about "supporting" this and "improving" that leading to an unspoken expectation that they would. Conversely, Rachel Reeves has already stated, even before her expected appointment as Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the private sector needs to do the investing. (Isn't that what caused the whole PFI problem for the NHS last time around?)
I feel this is very much a "watch this space". Starmer's honeymoon is going to be short. Very short.
