IIn Britain, in September 1939, it became known as the Phony War. Hitler invaded Poland and war was declared. But for months there was little military action. At home, the country was on a war footing. But this was not yet the decisive moment. That moment would come later, one that would last for years and change the country forever.
Britain in August 2024 is a period comparable to the trajectory of Keir Starmer’s term as prime minister. Labour has been elected and is entrenched in power. It has a radically different programme from its predecessor, and its size is widely underestimated. But this is not a defining moment either. For Britain, this might be called the period of false government.
Of course, important things have happened since the 4th of July. Nothing is more indicative of the direction of the new government than First Minister Rachel Reeves’ acceptance this week of the civil service pay decision, or First Minister Angela Rayner’s house-building plans. But the novelty of the existence of a Labour government remains the most important. Substantive governance has so far been mostly exploratory, and sometimes performative. This is not yet the government it will eventually be, or be judged by in four or five years’ time.
None of this is surprising. Change takes time. Rishi Sunak, not Starmer, was in Downing Street four weeks ago. It takes months to get used to the mechanisms of power, and even longer to take action that has consequences, let alone the kind of action that people actually notice and approve of. It is too early to praise or criticise the way Labour is governing. We cannot afford to be too hasty.
All of this has been factored into Starmer’s plans for a long time. The slow approach has been hinted at for months. Most of what’s happened over the past month was included in the playbook for the first few weeks devised by his chief of staff, Sue Gray, before the election. Notably, the strategy of attacking the Conservatives on the scale of the task Labour has inherited. Put some issues under internal review from day one. Public Financethe NHS, defence and a host of other issues have emerged suggesting that Starmer intends to extend the false government phase until at least the autumn.
When Parliament returns in September it won’t mean the end of the sham government. There will only be a short session before the autumn conference recess. MPs will be preoccupied with getting seats on new select committees. Labour’s House Whip will be focused on getting control of the process. Ministers will be focused on the Budget and Spending Review on 30 October. The Conservative Party will not have a new leader until November, but he will need time to settle in.
So, even allowing for unexpected events, it may still be some months before the dialectic of events begins to shape the Starmer plan. But that time will come. When it does, the story of the Labour government will need to be written more seriously and in a less dogmatic way than it is now. When the real thing takes over from the fake, perhaps in October and November, a series of foreseeable pressure points will shape the story.
The government has been open about some of these pressures, but not others. Economic management is allowed, and Reeves is trying to balance the long term (higher pay for civil servants) with the status quo (cutting spending) as the economy slowly recovers (this week’s interest rate cut was a modest sign) and the budget approaches.
The precariousness of the health service and long waiting lists are widely recognised as another crisis. Winter pressures may provide an early test. There is also a clear recognition of the strategic need, on many levels, for Britain to re-establish its relationship with Europe. The election of Donald Trump would add urgency to this, but it would certainly happen even if he were to lose.
Ministers appear ill-prepared for other issues that could derail the government and erode its popularity — chief among them rural and community resistance to planned changes to energy infrastructure and housing. Fears of lawlessness, such as that seen on the streets of many cities after the Southport murder, could also end Labor’s honeymoon sooner than expected.
All of this could have an electoral impact on Labour’s new large coalition of seats. Rural opposition to pylons, anger in north-east Scotland over a ban on North Sea oil drilling, and commuter anxiety over green belt building plans all now threaten Labour MPs. Capital’s housing target lowered It might provide the city’s poor Conservatives with a housing issue to rally around.
There may also be serious problems with the way Labour does politics. The party is suddenly very powerful. It doesn’t have to consider backbench rebels, other parties or outside opinion. It can appoint whoever it wants to office. But it will be harder to run if MPs feel at risk. And it will take just one questionable appointment for Labour’s claims of integrity to start to crumble. Hopes of electoral reform have come so far after the most unrepresentative election result in our country’s history.
This is not to say that Labour is inevitably going to be driven against the same kinds of sordid political rocks that doomed the Conservatives. But those rocks have not gone away, nor has the immutable truth that what matters most in politics is the leader’s credibility as prime minister and the chancellor’s management of the economy.
Since the 4th of July, Starmer has slipped neatly into the role of effective Prime Minister. His challenge is to ensure that the government is free of the taint of corruption, cronyism and untrustworthiness. Meanwhile, Reeves has become another powerful figure in government. Her challenge is different. Her Mais lecture Speaking to business and finance leaders in March, she spoke about key issues including industrial strategy, the role of the state, greening the economy and marrying public security with economic growth. The longer-term test will be whether she can achieve any of these goals in the face of immediate budget and spending pressures.
It will always be debatable whether periods of sham wars and sham governments are a harbinger of something more decisive, or simply a symptom of a lack of reflexive will. Acting swiftly and ruthlessly is sometimes the best policy. In 1940 the sham war ended with the fall of France. Chamberlain resigned and Churchill succeeded him. Starmer leads the country in a very different era. Yet when sham gives way to real, and that will soon be the case, Starmer will get his true test – the test he deserves to be judged by.
