Britain’s new prime minister looked happy and relaxed as he strode through Westminster to listen to the King outline the government’s plans for its first term in office. While its main “missions” have been limited to five, this translates into a hefty programme of 40 separate bills.
But even if limited parliamentary opposition helps to propel most of these on to the statute books, the difficulties Sir Keir Starmer faces in achieving his ambitions are huge. Events, the “unknown unknowns”, will inevitably get in the way, and the pitiful state of the nation’s finances leaves no contingency.
That lack of cash, locked in by an aggressively prudent chancellor until she can conjure some growth, makes Labour’s missions look distinctly long term. Yet the biggest obstacles ahead may lie in the contradictions inherent in some of the plans and within electors themselves.
The most obvious of these is the commitment to enhanced devolution, simultaneous with legislation for central government to seize more power over crucial planning decisions.
So, while the English Devolution bill promises “to give local leaders…more power over strategic planning”, the Planning and Infrastructure bill will “simplify the consenting process for major infrastructure projects”.
Local opposition to wind farms has jeopardised the transition to green power by forcing interminable delays in the planning process. If that transition is to happen, government must have the tools to override the Nimby tendencies and be brave enough to use them, even if it risks alienating some mayors and MPs.
And if the country is to come anywhere near to meeting the desperate housing need, then it is essential the government insists that devolved authorities use their new powers to deliver that housing. If not, government must decide where new housing developments will be sited.
Where these two bills feature in the legislative timetable will be indicative of the government’s real commitment to get Britain building again. The perceived damage to the landscape will undoubtedly alienate some who voted Labour at the last election. It would be sensible to move fast and leave time for the worst of the anger to subside before the next election.
Another area fraught with pitfalls for the government is that of crime and punishment. The state of the UK’s prisons appears criminal in itself.
The only short-term fix is to cut short the amount of time prisoners spend inside and, almost immediately after winning the election, Labour announced it would be doing that, while it would also build new prisons (and, by designating them as national infrastructure, it aims to ensure they will be built where it wants, no matter what local objections may arise).
But simply locking people away is not a long-term solution. As the new lord chancellor, Shabana Mahmood, has acknowledged, reoffending is the cause of nearly 80% of offending, and thus the reason why the UK has Europe’s highest proportion of population in prison.
The government has pledged to improve rehabilitation and reduce reoffending, and the appointment of a non-politician prison reform campaigner, James Timpson, as prisons minister seems to demonstrate a commitment to that. Yet the Crime and Policing bill promises to create several new offences, and to take steps to ensure that there is a significant increase in the percentage of crimes recorded that lead to people being charged.
In many cases options other than prison, often involving community service, education and addiction treatment, could be more effective and cheaper, but any move in that direction would cause apoplexy in the right wing media. It might also be difficult to reconcile with the Victims, Courts and Public Protection bill, which promises to “put the needs of victims first” and “protect the public from sex offenders”.
Sir Keir and his team have promised to bring real change. The King’s Speech was intended to demonstrate that purposeful approach, but fewer, better thought-through bills might have been better.
As the previous regime made all too clear, legislating is the relatively easy part, particularly given a massive Commons majority. Implementation is what matters, and that is harder.
