If Rachel Reeves needs to raise taxes in order to stabilise the economy and prevent public service cuts, is it worth breaking a manifesto promise? Given there are still virtually four years before the latest possible date of the next general election (15th August 2029), could the Government have sufficient time to weather the inevitable political storm? If the ensuing time led to a spectacular improvement in the economy? If it provided more money in people's pockets? If mortgage rates were lower? If the small boats were stopped and net immigration minimised? If they succeeded in hitting their house build target? If NHS waiting lists came down dramatically?
That's a lot of Ifs. Even so, my question stands.
I don't know enough about economics to judge what is the country's economic situation and, if it's bad, how best to remedy that. But it's pretty clear that, all things being equal, raising taxes - even income tax and/or VAT - is what you would do if you hadn't made that manifesto commitment. And if you weren't prepared to cut public services.
So it's not an economic decision, it's a political one.
But the Government has a majority of 165.
ChatGPT, answering my question "are there examples of governments reneging on manifesto commitments?" started with the absurd line that "Manifestos are more marketing documents than binding contracts" [good luck to any government that tries to argue that]. Notably, the Liberal Democrats took 14 years to recover after going back on "scrap university tuition fees" but that was arguably a different situation - they were the minor partners in a coalition. Nevertheless it's a problem in any first past the post election system that in order to get elected you have to promise things which are economically illiterate. I wonder whether there was a better way of smooching the manifesto words to give the intention without making a commitment. But that probably wouldn't stand up in an adversarial election campaign.
I do think there are arguments about "harsh global conditions" (as Reeves has been reported saying today) that slightly eases the pain, and she has to be prepared to detail the exact consequences of those conditions - so many billions due to US tariffs, so many to increasing defence spending as a result of Russian aggression, so many to the rising global costs of borrowing - in the upcoming budget. And there is a "strong government in the national interest" argument to be made, particularly to your rebellious backbenchers.
In addition to the LibDems fiasco, there has been a surprising number of instances of governments breaking manifesto commitments. In 1992, John Major’s government had pledged not to introduce VAT on domestic fuel. In power, they slapped 8% VAT on it. They then lost the 1997 election to a Labour landslide. That Labour government promised not to introduce top-up university tuition fees but legislated to more or less break that. Their majority was halved at the next election. The Conservative 2019 manifesto promised no new taxes and no rise in National Insurance, subsequently increased NI and then in 2024 lost to another Labour landslide.
So the auguries are not great. Even so...
This is probably about leadership. There is no way you could expect your Chancellor of the Exchequer to take the hit herself; the Prime Minister would have to stand firm alongside the Chancellor - we're in it together. That goes for the Cabinet too.
Sir Kier Starmer has proved himself to be a good leader on the international stage but, at the slightest sign of political pressure from his own side, he has been unable to bring himself to face down rebellions, with disastrous economic consequences. His first speech after becoming Prime Minister included the phrase “We’ve changed the Labour Party, returned it to service — and that is how we will govern, country first, party second.” So far it could be said that hasn't been true.
I think it's time for bold. assertive leadership. Reiterate the "country first" pledge, support the Chancellor's "harsh global conditions" context, face down Badenoch at PMQs when she challenges about broken promises with "what would you do?" and tell the media you will stand together with Reeves 100%. And no fudging, no weasel words: tell it straight - "we are breaking our manifesto promise because....."
Time to step up and show us what you're made of.
