Analysis: Why are the wrong issues under the microscope?
You’d be forgiven for assuming one of Sabrina Carpenter’s (admittedly catchy) lyrics might have been echoing in Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ head, as she prepared ahead of her (less catchy) Spring Statement yesterday.
But, when quizzed at a press conference later that afternoon, Reeves insisted as “a 46-year-old woman”, she is not “personally a huge fan” of the 25-year-old pop star Sabrina Carpenter – despite being at the centre of another spat for accepting free tickets to her concert at the O2. So, maybe not.
You also might be wondering why this has anything to do with the Spring Statement – or the other row Labour is currently facing over cuts to the welfare system and disability benefits.
But I’d argue these two issues are, in some ways, two sides of the same coin. It’s a simplification, but ask yourself whether they are big, or small, and you reach the same conclusion: they highlight the way the bigger issues facing the economy and the UK go under the radar. If things were different, they would either not be taking place, or not widely opposed.
Gig tickets
Let’s take the gig tickets. Most reasonable people, I think, probably accept that it is a bit different to take your kids to a pop concert, or attending a football match, if you are the Prime Minister, Chancellor, or cabinet minister, whether in the UK, Japan, Australia or Germany.
There are security concerns to be aware of; maybe you have to take bodyguards along. You also don’t really want to get in the way of or disrupt other people’s night out. Reeves cited those security concerns, and the fact that a member of her family (she is a parent to two children) was eager to attend.
In a world, however, where Britain had a different relationship to its politicians and to politics itself – more trusting, with more of a sense of balance between the perceived ‘us and them’ – we might be more likely to shrug this off, or simply accept it as a product of a high-profile job.
But pollster Luke Tryll, from More in Common, reports recent findings that 49 per cent of Brits believe the cost of living crisis will never end – and a majority of all ages above 45 state that the UK is either returning to, or never left, austerity – especially among the elderly.
The financial reality for many, and the damage to public trust of Partygate, and Labour’s own ‘freebiegate’ scandal – even the historic MPs expenses scandal – sits uncomfortably in this context.
In reality, the current sense of dissatisfaction with politicians – of all stripes – and the pervasive sense that things are bad, and likely to get worse, feeds this sense of anger.
Welfare changes
Welfare changes then are another issue which obscures the underlying reality, and a much more important one. The economy is not growing by very much at all, which isn’t expected to change, and Labour was elected pledging the highest sustained economic growth in the G7.
In another world, where so-called ‘big stuff’ was going well – the graphs and GDP numbers all ticking upwards, the absence of a housing crisis choking productivity, wages keeping pace with the price of a pint (even at the O2), the government wouldn’t so urgently need that £5bn – or £3.4bn – back from the welfare bill.
Compared to the £1,276.2bn of overall government spending for 2024-25, and mathematically, it becomes a worryingly small figure, to be treated as so important.
Ironically, of course, as campaigners have swiftly pointed out, it represents a significant enough chunk of household income to push some 250,000 people into relative poverty.
Even with growing costs post-Covid, under different circumstances, it might be possible to help people into jobs, in a more measured, and more meaningful way. Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride even found himself criticising Labour – apparently from the left – as he warned of the impact on the “vulnerable”. It might even be a fight Labour didn’t need to choose to have.
But, we live in this world, where Labour now faces outrage from its own backbenchers and may still lose, again, its economic headroom before the next Budget anyway.
In this context then, those seemingly ‘small’ issues, become overwhelmingly significant, when there’s precious little else being done about the vast ones.