UK Labour's landslide comes with its own perils: experts

Labour on Friday secured a huge majority in the UK's general election, giving it a massive mandate but also a few headaches once celebrations die down.

Before the vote, the Conservatives warned voters not to hand Labour party leader Keir Starmer the "blank cheque" of a "supermajority", but as prime minister he will now have a majority of over 170 and five years up against a demoralised main opposition.

"The main advantages are clarity. It means the government of the day can get on with its programme, unhindered and encumbered," Tony McNulty, lecturer at Queen Mary University of London and a Labour minister under Tony Blair, told AFP.

The thumping win also gives Labour "a nice reservoir of talent" with which to fill government roles, albeit with the risk of disappointing more MPs who miss out, said McNulty, who became an MP during Labour's 1997 landslide.

However, a "supermajority" does not have any constitutional significance in the UK, as it does in the United States, explained King's College London professor Vernon Bogdanor.

"A government with a majority of 30 can do more or less what it wants, just as much as a government with a majority of 200," said Bogdanor, one of the country's leading constitutional experts.

- 'Punishment' vote -

Some of the potential problems that Starmer will need to manage stem from quirks of the UK's first-past-the-post electoral system and the fragmentation of its political landscape, which have conspired to produce one of the most unequal results in electoral history.

"The system doesn't work very well when you've got so many parties," said Bogdanor.

Labour looks set to win fewer votes than it did in its disastrous 2019 election, but gain around 210 more seats in the 650-seat parliament thanks to the fractured right-wing opposition.

Only around one in three voters chose Labour, leaving Starmer having to balance the wants of his army of MPs and a public that is, paradoxically, not particularly enthusiastic for the incoming government.

Starmer's approval ratings are some of the lowest for an incoming prime minister, with polls by Ipsos and YouGov in May showing them at minus 18 and minus 20 points.

"It's a punishment election. People simply want to punish the Conservatives," said Bogdanor.

"Expectations are high for improvement in the health service, and other services, but they won't come about quickly.

"And the fiscal situation is very dire. Most people agree that the NHS (National Health Service) is in very serious trouble. What is going to be done?" he asked, adding that tax rises appeared inevitable.

- 'Great dilemma' -

"All sorts of other improvements need to be made in the public services: the environment, sewage in the rivers and seas, housing policy, school repairs. It's a great dilemma for an incoming government.

"So there'll be rapid disillusionment, and particularly people on the left will attack the government," he warned.

McNulty said the public will "initially" give the government the benefit of the doubt, but "how long that lasts is the moot point".

As a result, Starmer will hope to focus on issues that unite the party and are popular with the public.

The most obvious one would be eliminating the two-child benefit cap, which McNulty said was "totemic" internally and could deliver immediate results in tackling poverty.

Potential wedge issues include Gaza, where there is pressure from the left-wing to take a tougher stance on Israel, and immigration, where the public support harder policies that Labour MPs are opposed to.

Having such a large majority will also give Labour MPs, most of whom have never been politicians before, the confidence they can rebel in large numbers without inflicting defeat on the government.

"Often with a large majority there is more scope for disaffection, so it is not always good to win a landslide," said Bogdanor.

In order to ensure harmony, McNulty advised Starmer to accept that dissenting voices "need to be at least recognised and given space".

jwp/phz/fg