Why No 10’s decision to rebuke Louise Haigh is so instructive – Politics.co.uk

Starmer also committed to taking a “tough love” approach to Britain’s public finances at the upcoming autumn budget. “No matter how many people advise you to ignore it”, he said, “you must run towards the fire to put it out, not let it spread further.”

But today: some thoughts on No 10’s rebuke of transport secretary Louise Haigh last week, after she criticised P&O Ferries and urged consumers to boycott the company. Downing Street later insisted Haigh’s comments were “her own personal views and did not represent the views of the government.”

What does this tell us about the government’s messaging, Labour’s economic agenda and Starmerism’s political make-up?

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Haigh and dry

Starmerism relies on different messengers, beholden to contrasting styles and reputations, giving voice to complementary messages. This approach, of course, is both to be expected and entirely proper. Political success generally relies on wide (if not deep) electoral coalitions. Spokespeople, as such, are duly deployed to speak to specific sections.

Wes Streeting, for instance, is an effective communicator because he is a creative communicator — a fact that is regularly evinced at the Conservatives’ dear expense. Angela Rayner, meanwhile, has established herself as a bridge between the Labour leadership and the trade union movement. Jonathan Reynolds, conversely but harmoniously, is well-suited to the frontline of Labour’s Prawn Cocktail Offensive (more on that in a moment). And Ed Miliband, as I boldly argued last month, does the “upbeat” aspects of Labour’s messaging better than anyone in government.

These different strengths, almost inextricably, implicate a spokesperson’s unique politics. Again, that isn’t a problem — until it is.

Last week, No 10 Downing Street pointedly rebuked a cabinet minister for their public comments delivered, ostensibly, in their capacity as a government official. Louise Haigh, the transport secretary, was said to have been freelancing when she urged consumers to boycott P&O Ferries.

In an interview with ITV on Wednesday, Haigh described P&O as a “rogue operator” — a reference to the company’s actions in 2022, when it sacked nearly 800 seafarers and replaced them with cheaper foreign agency workers. Asked whether she used the ferry service, Haigh said: “I’ve been boycotting P&O Ferries for two-and-a-half years and I would encourage consumers to do the same.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The transport secretary’s comments coincided with her department announcing new legislation aimed at protecting seafarers’ jobs from so-called “fire and rehire” practices. But they were also issued days before DP World, P&O Ferries’ owner, announced it would be investing £1 billion investment in the UK, as part of an expansion of the firm’s London Gateway port, in Essex.

Upon being made aware of Haigh’s remarks, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, chief executive of Dubai-based DP World, threatened to boycott the government’s Investment Summit and placed its port expansion plans under review.

With the already-announced investment and the government’s credibility at stake, No 10 intervened. A spokesperson clarified that Haigh’s comments were “her own personal views and did not represent the views of the government”. As a result, Ahmed bin Sulayem will now attend the government’s investment summit, and he intends to move forward with his company’s UK investment plans.

Suffice it to say, this is significant for a few reasons. First, as The New Statesman’s George Eaton points out, Starmer’s cabinet has been strikingly united since it entered government in July. Accusations of disunity, particularly as they pertained to the role of Sue Gray, were instead levelled at faceless advisers in No 10. This is the first instance of cabinet-level discord.

But there is another, even more significant, point to make. Haigh, of whom you might be hearing for the first time, is not one of Starmer’s most prominent spokespeople. Compared to the posts of foreign secretary or home secretary, whose offices often shape the news agenda, the post of transport secretary is simply less exposed.

Mark Harper served as transport secretary for the entirety of Rishi Sunak’s premiership. And while he was a fixture across the media as one of the ex-PM’s few loyalist figures, he was not one of Sunak’s lead ministers. Indeed, the decision to scrap the second leg of HS2 — the last government’s premier transport policy — was spearheaded by the Treasury, then Jeremy Hunt’s fiefdom.

But Haigh, despite holding a “lesser” cabinet role, is relatively integral to the Starmer project’s ideological make-up and its grounding in the parliamentary Labour Party.

The prime minister, who isn’t an instinctively political being, is actually rather unmoored in Labour. This isn’t necessarily a negative; indeed, in refusing to overtly and obsessively identify with a faction, Starmer’s “unity” pleas probably have greater weight. But as Rishi Sunak (who relied on personal loyalists like Harper) found, it can have downsides too.

The so-called “soft left”, which Haigh is said to represent, is a pivotal feature of Labour’s current factional settlement. Starmer, notably and purposefully, ensured its champions took up the government posts they shadowed in opposition 100 days ago; in fact, Lisa Nandy, the now-culture secretary, received a promotion. (However, there is an argument to say the soft left fared less well in Labour’s junior ministerial ranks.)

Still, individuals like Haigh — and for that matter Nandy, Rayner and Miliband — provide the party leadership with anchoring in parliament, particularly among MPs who identify with Labour’s “soft left” traditions.

This P&O Ferries controversy, however, underlines that Starmer is not willing to let this informal “soft left” group step out of line. In time, this could have consequences for cabinet reshuffles — but it also reflects nascent political tensions at the heart of the government’s industrial agenda.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The championing of a “partnership” between unions/workers and business is one of the central tenets of Starmerism — and was the rhetorical gloss applied to the government’s Employment Rights Bill when it was unveiled last week. (Nor is it an accident that the Investment Summit today immediately followed the workers’ rights announcement. Starmer sees both as pointing towards his government’s defining “mission”: economic growth.)

Now, this is a tactful rhetorical formation, designed (in part) to neutralise criticisms that Labour is advancing workers’ rights as part of a totemic ideological grudge against big business. Indeed, as Starmer told business leaders in attendance at the investment summit today: “I know some people may be wondering about our labour market policies introduced last week. Let me be clear — they are pro-growth. Workers with more security at work, with higher wages — that is a better growth model for this country.”

But No 10’s act of rebuking Haigh does reflect a tension in this specifically Starmerite formulation. Logically, and as evinced by Haigh’s alleged misstep, the “soft left” will find aspects of the government’s simultaneous pro-worker and pro-business agendas more difficult to bridge than those on the Labour right (read Jonathan Reynolds).

Still, Haigh, as transport secretary, is also in charge of spearheading Labour’s historic rail nationalisation scheme — the biggest nationalisation programme in 50 years. Haigh’s Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill will see rail services brought back into public control when contracts with operators come to an end.

That, in effect, is Haigh’s lane — which her political profile makes her ideal to pursue. But as business secretary Reynolds said on Sunday, he speaks “for the government on business issues”. In other words: stay in your lane, Haigh.

Haigh’s advocacy of a traditional and principled progressive argument has, ultimately, found her accused of contravening collective responsibility. It is an example of how some on Labour’s “soft left” will at times find their instincts at odds with those of Starmer’s core leadership team.

This, I should stress, is not a reflection on the efficacy of Labour’s economic strategy, or even the rationale behind its bid to consolidate worker and business interests. Rather, it underlines that this approach does, after all, involve political compromises — and leading Labour politicians making them.

In the end, a government’s compromises probably tell us more about its ideological and practical intent than its untempered announcements. Slowly but surely, the political dynamics that will shape the evolution of this Labour government are becoming clearer.

Lunchtime briefing

Senior Conservative ‘desperately hopes’ to avoid another leadership contest

Lunchtime soundbite

‘I think people will be in no doubt when we do the budget that those with the broadest shoulders will be bearing the largest burden’

— Chancellor Rachel Reeves says rich Britons will “bear the largest burden” at the autumn budget. Via the New Statesman’s NS podcast.

Now try this…

‘Voters have not given up with Labour despite its poor start, new poll suggests’
PoliticsHome reports.

‘Keir Starmer will promise to slash red tape as he hosts investment summit’
Via The Guardian.

‘‘Time stopped’ after Salmond collapsed at conference’
BBC News reports.

On this day in 2023:

Minister refuses to rule out TikTok ban on government devices amid security concerns