* But not really happy to see the constant language about "strict spending rules" and "stability". I know he's committed to not return to austerity, but this stuff sounds like it could be from a Cameron/Osborne-era manifesto.
Such is the world we live in.
Politics is often limited by the space of what is deemed credible. Labour has a credibility problem. Irrespective of their actual competence, all the attacks on them over the decades have worked: the inclination of many voters is to not trust them. Thus Labour is especially vulnerable to stepping beyond the bounds of what the press, businesses and centre ground think is safe and reasonable, even in the face of a Tory party seemingly intent on burning the country down in their own civil war.
But stability is a big thing. The country is in a weak condition, both the general economy and government finances. There may genuinely be little room for manoeuver, such that overpromising and necessarily underdelivering could then do them a lot of damage after the election. Stability is the opposite of what the Tories have offered these last 14 years: nation-shaking referenda, Brexit, rabble-rousing, culture wars, blame games, internal party wrangles, constant churn of ministers, all the whilst key infrastructure, services and social support have withered. The Tories blather on about "British Microsoft" and all these exciting possibilities. Sure, go and sail away and explore amazing new opportunites: but if the boat is knackered, you're most likely just going to sink. Stability might be dull and uninspiring, but sometimes it's also what's needed.
labour.org.uk
