The dictat from Labour high command is that nothing can be taken for granted – certainly not the 99% likelihood which Sir John Curtice places on Labour forming the next government, after the general election.
The latest major survey, by YouGov, gives Sir Keir Starmer a landslide victory of a scale just short of Tony Blair’s landslide in 1997 when Labour won a 179-seat majority.
It gives Labour 403 MPs, the Conservatives 155, Liberal Democrats 49 and the SNP 23 – amounting to a 154 Labour overall majority.
Another recent large survey, by Survation using the same MRP technique of big samples analysed by region, is more apocalyptic for the Conservatives. It pushes the Tories down to around only 100 MPs and would give Sir Keir a record-breaking 256 majority.
Labour’s current representation in the Commons would double while the Conservatives would be more than halved.
More on Conservatives
Related Topics:
The Reform Party would have no MPs.
In both these MRP polls and in the numerous national opinion polls over the last couple of years, prominent Conservative MPs and ministers are on course to lose their seats.
Advertisement
Those at risk include Iain Duncan Smith, Jacob Rees Mogg, Penny Mordaunt, Jeremy Hunt, Grant Shapps and James Cleverly.
Public opinion seems remarkably settled. Many Conservative MPs feel nobody is listening to them anymore.
Who would be in a landslide Labour government?
Just suppose the polls are right for once and the gap between the parties does not narrow in the run-up to voting, the nation, if not the ever-cautious Labour leadership, needs to start thinking what a landslide Labour government would look like.
There is nothing like the enthusiasm there was for the charismatic Tony Blair in 1997 – Keir Starmer has negative personal ratings, only much better than Rishi Sunak.
Voters are more disillusioned by politicians of any kind than they were then but a landslide would be a landslide and there are some comparisons to be drawn.
When a team wins comfortably it is difficult to change the line-up. It must be assumed that Prime Minister Starmer will flank himself with the same shadow cabinet in the same jobs.
In the great offices of state, neither David Lammy at the Foreign Office nor Chancellor Rachel Reeves would arrive with anything like the authority and reputation enjoyed by Robin Cook and Gordon Brown.
They would also be coming in at more difficult times economically and internationally.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
At the Home Office, the veteran Yvette Cooper is a match for Jack Straw. She will need to deal credibly with immigration, currently the most inflamed topic of public concern.
Fresh creative thinking is more likely to come from less senior ministers such as Wes Streeting at health and deputy leader Angela Rayner.
Starmer plans to keep control by building up an executive government consisting of himself, Reeves, Rayner and Pat McFadden. Reeves and McFadden are primarily enforcers of economic discipline. Tensions may soon emerge even in this top group as Starmer and Reeves come under internal pressure to deliver tangible improvements in public services.
Labour will lack excuses if the polls are accurate
An overwhelming majority would deprive Labour of excuses not to deliver on what it has promised.
In its first 100 days, the new Labour government will have to enact what little it has trailed including VAT on private schools and a new deal for workers and trade unions.
It would be able get anything through parliament. This, along with trying not to put up unnecessary targets for the Conservatives, may explain the lack of specificity about the five missions which Starmer has set himself.
It may be that something similar to Blair’s pledge card, which set up modest achievable goals in the main areas of public concern, emerges during the campaign.
At present there are little more than warm words from Labour on improving growth, the NHS, green energy, education and childcare. Similarly Reeves is promising reorganisation and new quangos which only relate remotely to the high growth economy Labour says it needs.
In a landslide, more than half of Labour’s MPs will be first-timers at Westminster. There has been an effort to select “Starmtroopers” in winnable seats, but the leadership will not know them all.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
The new Labour parliamentary party will be younger. Millennial concerns such as housing and the cost of universities will be higher up the agenda.
The backfiring of Brexit on the Conservatives and gender self-ID on the Scottish government is likely to discourage bids to force the pace on divisive issues.
Neither his MPs nor the party conference gave Blair much trouble during his first term. Starmer would likely benefit as well from a mix of inexperience and gratitude.
With the new prime minister simultaneously committed to executive government and “powering up” the regions, challenge from within Labour is likely to come from the mayors in Manchester, Liverpool and London, assuming they are re-elected in their own right this year.
Her Majesty’s Opposition cannot be expected to put up much actual opposition if crushed in a landslide.
The Conservatives would be impotent in parliament and, if 1997-2005 is anything to go by, more interested in their own internal battles over party leadership.
The Liberal Democrats would relish their restoration as the UK’s official third force at the expense of the SNP. Little beyond virtue signalling can be expected from either of those parties.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
For much of Blair’s time in office, constructive scrutiny of the government was led by the mainstream media, courted and cajoled by Peter Mandelson and Alastair Campbell.
There will be no repeat of this. The print and broadcast landscape has fragmented with many outlets more committed to campaigning than reporting fairly.
Like Barack Obama and Joe Biden in the US, Starmer should expect to come under vicious assault from day one. There will be no honeymoon.
After what will have been a “time for a change” election, the electorate may be inclined to give the new government the benefit of the doubt for a long period – but how long?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:55
The Labour leader says there wasn’t much ’emotional space’ for him growing up.
Starmer has repeatedly signalled that his government will need two terms to deliver real change. A landslide victory would provide the best basis on which to build.
In hindsight, Tony Blair has repeatedly bemoaned that his government got off to a slow start and failed to deliver as much as it could have done in its first term.
Far from planning for a landslide, his campaign team before his first victory were preoccupied with preparations for coalition with Paddy Ashdown’s Liberal Democrats.
Caution is one thing, making the best of your opportunities is another. The many voters telling the pollsters that they want a Labour victory must hope that someone, somewhere in Starmer’s rigid hierarchy is thinking hard about what they would do with a big win.
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.
It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.
But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.
Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”
The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.
And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.
Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.
Advertisement
He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.
“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”
Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.
Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.
However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:28
Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss
Government figures ‘misleading’
The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.
Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.
Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.
Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.
APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.
Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.