by David Mills
POLTICAL fortunes are almost as volatile as the stock markets at present, with Labour’s ratings now apparently in inverse proportion to the FTSE 100 index. The last time politics was so volatile was in 1982, after the Falklands War, when Margaret Thatcher turned a 20 per cent opinion poll deficit into a landslide general election victory within 12 months.
Some Labour MPs have raised the Falklands parallel, to sniggers from the Conservatives and commentators, although there is more to it than the simple similarity in opinion poll trends. Thatcher arguably caused the Falklands conflict by withdrawing the Royal Navy’s aircraft carrier from the South Atlantic, but when British forces regained the islands, such was the relief that the war had been won, the origins of the conflict and Thatcher’s negligence in allowing the Argentinians to invade was forgotten – much to the chagrin of opposition politicians. In the 12 months between victory on the battlefield and the 1983 election, Michael Foot and Labour in general couldn’t make the charge stick on Thatcher personally. Even today, the argument that she basically caused the war which saved her career is regarded as faintly revisionist.
Whether Gordon Brown can “do a Thatcher” now and claim credit for his decisive action in bailing out British banks may determine the result of the next general election. The parallels are not entirely reassuring for Labour. For all the suffering and cost involved in retaking the Islands, the victory was total and dramatic in a way which the recovery from the past few weeks of economic turbulence cannot be. Also, beyond the families of service personnel, the war didn’t affect a large percentage of the population, whereas the current crisis affects everyone, from millionaires downwards.
The war also helped Thatcher to reinforce negative messages about Labour. Martial decisiveness of the kind she showed in sending a task force to the South Atlantic was a stark contrast to the unilateralism which formed the basis of Labour’s defence policy.
Here, the parallels may be more encouraging for Labour. Just as Thatcher used the Falklands to reinforce doubts about Labour’s firmness on defence matters, Labour has to convince the public that, for all their tactical political ability, David Cameron and George Osborne are, basically, callow and unready for the enormous challenges which lie ahead – or at least less ready than Labour’s top team.
The public will be aware that tax increases and public spending cuts might be needed, and if Labour can convince the public that it should be trusted to make those cuts rather than the Tories, the battle will be half won.
The danger is that Labour’s brand as guardian of the lower paid and of the middle classes has been tarnished by mistakes such as the ham-fisted abolition of the 10 pence tax rate. Labour must hope that the economic storm that has swept so much value off the FTSE will also have rinsed voters’ minds clean of such mistakes.
