Alex Snowdon on Starmer, Foot and the Trump rally shooting

What can we expect from Labour in office? Ten days on from the formation of Keir Starmer’s government, two developments stand out as powerful portents of what lies ahead.

The first is the new prime minister’s claim that pay increases for public sector workers are unaffordable. Starmer remarked that “finances are in a very poor state”. He explicitly used the prison crisis as an excuse for withholding pay rises, claiming that it is necessary to prioritise the most urgent needs – “and prisons is top of that list, I’m afraid”.

The idea that a government can only do one thing at a time – despite having numerous departments of the civil service at its disposal – is a novel and original one. Of course it isn’t a genuine reason: the fact that Starmer made his comments while attending a Nato summit illustrates that multiple priorities can be pursued at once.

It is also nonsense to claim the money isn’t there. It would help, for example, if Labour didn’t pledge to increase military spending to 2.5% of GDP. Or if Labour hadn’t – during the election campaign – pledged to avoid making tax rises. Well-targeted tax rises aimed at the rich, such as a wealth tax or increases to corporation tax, would open up big opportunities to spend more on what we really need.

Pay is tied up with the broader issue of investment in public services – something urgently needed after many years of Tory austerity. Education illustrates the point. Teachers and school support staff deserve a pay rise. But it is also an urgent necessity for the sake of our schools and the millions of children and young people who rely on them.

Teacher pay is a crucial factor in improving teacher recruitment (something that the incoming education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, clearly recognises is essential) and in the even more important issue of teacher retention (something that, worryingly, Labour politicians have been less keen to talk about). Ensuring there are adequate numbers of teachers is indispensable to any efforts at improving education.

The media have focused on how these comments from Starmer put the government on a collision course with unions. This is broadly true, though there are some union leaders (especially in unions affiliated to the Labour Party) who are determined to give the new government more chances than it deserves.

At Saturday’s Durham Miners’ Gala, however, it was clear that some unions are gearing up to fight for more. And it was equally clear that demands which go beyond what Labour is offering are very popular. Speakers who called for the repeal of all anti-union laws, immediate investment in public services or public ownership of privatised utilities got a great reception.

The transatlantic knot tightens

The second salutary development is the prime minister’s part in the Nato summit. Labour’s key motif in its election campaign was change, but the Nato summit was about precisely the opposite.

This was Starmer’s chance to insist on continuity with previous Tory governments. It followed the new defence secretary, John Healey, announcing a new arms deal for the Ukrainian government.

Many political commentators are keen to justify right-wing Labour policies on the basis of them being electorally popular. This is not true either in general or in this particular instance: polls indicate that large numbers of people are opposed to more military spending and very wary of further military interventions. The truth is that Labour front benchers are motivated by their loyalty to the British state and the priorities of the establishment. Nobody exemplifies this better than Sir Keir.

The UK has already provided £7.6 billion of military support to Ukraine since February 2022, yet the war has become a stalemate and the numbers of Ukrainians backing a diplomatic settlement has risen sharply. Starmer has boasted of his ‘unshakeable commitment’ to Nato and pledged total support for maintaining nuclear weapons, as well as fuelling the war in Ukraine.

The so-called special relationship with the US is the core of UK foreign policy, irrespective of whether there is a Labour or Tory government. Starmer will have been delighted to have his photo taken with President Biden. He will have been thrilled that the president referred to the UK as the ‘transatlantic knot’ that ties Nato together, connecting the US with its (subordinate) European allies.

In the last couple of years, some European countries have ramped up their military spending. Starmer represents more of the same in matters of militarism and war. Yet these spending pledges and declarations of strong alliances mask underlying problems.

The war in Ukraine is going nowhere, with both sides unable to achieve their aims. Israel’s genocide in Gaza has exposed tensions between the US and Israel. The latter’s fresh threats to Lebanon bring the risk of yet more regional destabilisation.

All of this unfolds against the backdrop of declining US influence in a more multi-polar world. It is compounded by the domestic crisis in US politics. President Biden’s authority has been shattered lately by a series of public appearances where he has been incoherent. This weekend we saw another dramatic twist, with the shooting at Donald Trump’s Pennsylvania election rally.

This apparent assassination attempt is likely to boost the Republican candidate for November’s presidential election. Images of the former president with a raised fist following the shooting will be used to boost his image as proud, strong and defiant. The contrast to a bumbling and weak Biden will be obvious.

We should also be wary of the potential for this incident to be used to justify further state authoritarianism – whether by the current Biden adminstration or by a future Trump administration. Growing authoritarianism is an issue in many European countries too, including the UK. Here we have seen the mass demonstrations for Palestine push back against state coercion, but we cannot be complacent.

Words as weapons

The book that turned me into a socialist, when I was still at school in the 1990s, was ‘The Case for Socialism’, a short book by Paul Foot. This Thursday, it will be the 20th anniversary of Paul Foot’s death.

Saturday’s Daily Mirror marked the approaching anniversary with a double-page spread devoted to celebrating his life and work. This is not something you might expect for a lifelong revolutionary socialist, but Foot was a regular contributor to the Mirror for many years. I still have a copy of his selected articles from the 1980s – called ‘Words as Weapons’ – which is a masterclass in how to write as a socialist for a popular audience.

Foot’s most enduring contribution as a writer was almost certainly his book ‘The Vote’, published shortly after his death. It is in two halves. The first half is the inspiring story of how popular suffrage was won through a series of collective struggles, from the English Revolution to the suffragettes via the Chartists.

The latter half is more sobering, as it tells the story of how successive Labour governments squandered the potential of universal suffrage. Labour has repeatedly propped up capitalism, instead of delivering changes for working class people. It is very good that ‘The Vote’ has recently been re-published because it really couldn’t be more timely than now.