Downing Street’s claim that it had delivered “the single biggest upgrade of working rights in a generation” tells you almost everything about Labour’s current condition. The government was not announcing new legislation – it was just confirming that it would reverse Lords amendments weakening the bill it introduced last year.
The amendments, welcomed by business lobbies, had stripped out protections such as “day one” rights against unfair dismissal, and softened restrictions on fire-and-rehire. Reinstating the original provisions is the bare minimum that could be expected of a Labour government. But instead the mundane is spun by Downing Street as a transformative win.
And this illustrates a deeper problem: a government that promised bold economic change is reduced to theatre. The fear at the Trades Union Congress is that a once-ambitious bill has been weakened and, after the exit of Angela Rayner and her team, is now dependent on secondary legislation controlled by ministers no longer sympathetic to its original aims.
Labour insists it was elected to rebuild Britain – but it currently looks like a government content with tweaking the status quo while the rest of the country waits for real change. As a former minister, Louise Haigh, argued on Monday, Labour can’t renew Britain while trapped in the old framework. Real fiscal freedom isn’t a luxury – it’s a democratic duty. Blaming the Tories or deferring to the Office for Budget Responsibility no longer cuts it with voters. As Ms Haigh correctly reasons, Labour’s success demands breaking the rules that have stifled political ambition.
That’s why the deputy leadership contest matters – and why the way it’s being stage-managed speaks volumes. Any MP wanting to stand has a few days to collect about 80 signatures. The left will struggle to muster a candidate as eight of its MPs are suspended. There appears no time for a real campaign or meaningful debate. Which may be the point. But if Labour fears internal argument, how can it claim to renew democracy?
Without a contest of ideas, Labour risks becoming a technocratic shell just when voters are demanding bold, emotionally resonant alternatives. Labour may want to avoid an argument in public about its shortcomings over the past year. But the party is leaking support not just to Reform UK, but to the Liberal Democrats and Greens. More will be lost to a leftwing party led by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana. The combined Labour-Conservative share is at a historic low. A fragmented electorate is searching for meaning – and if Labour cannot offer it, others will.
This is why the new Labour Mainstream network matters. Backed by the influential Manchester mayor, Andy Burnham, and with broad support across the party, it is a serious attempt to re-anchor the party’s economic strategy in a broader democratic project. One of Mainstream’s key backers, Compass’s Neal Lawson, argues that Labour should define the role of deputy leader before debating candidates. That would have been a good start.
A real contest could give voice to Labour’s base – north to south, centre to left. It may force a rethink of unpopular policies on benefits and Gaza. It would show the party isn’t afraid of debate. And it could empower a deputy leader who speaks for neglected constituencies: the north, women and working‑class voters. Labour is leaking voters across the spectrum. It cannot afford, surely, to look like a party afraid of its own members.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
