When it comes to plans, the parties are on another planet.
The Tories have a clear plan as they go into this election.
It’s to tell everyone they have a plan.
This plan doesn’t actually exist, of course, but that doesn’t make any difference. It’s the idea of it that matters.
In a same way a resting actor will tell you they’re still in the game, the Conservative Party wants you to believe that they’re still seriously auditioning for parts. They are aiming high and their tireless efforts and clear focus will pay off in due course. It’s just a question of keeping the faith. And if an agent occasionally calls, that’s evidence the plan is working.
Inflation coming down? That’s the plan.
Migration numbers slightly off their record high? Thank goodness for the plan.
The Tories pledge sunshine after weeks of rain and, when there’s a gap in the clouds, their carefully constructed prayers and exhortations to the sun gods are proven to have paid dividends.
Now, of course, there’s another side to the Tory narrative about the plan. They’re not only keen to emphasise the fact they have one, but also firmly assert that Sir Keir Starmer and his new-look Labour Party don’t.
And this is where things start to become very confusing, because arguably the Tories are 100% right on this point.
Listen, for instance, to the Shadow Secretary for Education Bridget Phillipson, the other day on Question Time. Pressed on how she was going to tackle the crisis in higher education, she had little to offer. She rightly said that it was complex and there are no easy fixes. But she’s also fully aware that Rachel Reeves has promised no increases in taxation and borrowing to fund extra spending.
Listen to Yvette Cooper struggle when she’s challenged on how Labour’s immigration stance fundamentally differs from that of the Tories. Sure, Labour will get rid of the ridiculous, immoral and costly Rwanda plan. They rightly describe it as a gimmick. But in terms of what they will do, it’s basically much of what the Tories are already doing, badged slightly differently as a ‘Border Security Command’.
As I’ve commented before, Starmer came to politics late and I think his agenda is basically one of general decency and competence. God knows, it will make a welcome change and I wish him the best of luck in government. He doesn’t, however, have any clear ideological agenda in my view and I can believe his government could potentially head off in a number of different directions.
It might turn out to be a slightly more left-leaning and traditionally social democratic Labour, in the spirit of Wilson and Callaghan. It might be a pretty Blairite enterprise — governed fundamentally by outcomes rather than preconceived approaches. If it turned out to be pressured from the wider left into a more radical administration — particularly on cultural issues and foreign policy — that wouldn’t hugely surprise me either.
The truth is I don’t know. I just realise, along with many others, that the grotesque excuse for government that we endure right now cannot be allowed to continue.
So this is the election of plans.
The plan the Tories say they have, but don’t. Pitted against the plan that Labour doesn’t talk about, because it doesn’t exist.
We know that when matter meets anti-matter, there’s a problem. But my physics isn’t good enough to know what happens when anti-matter meets anti-matter.
