Rachel Reeves tries to deflect anger at Labour conference

Rachel Reeves discusses pro-business policies at the Bank of England (Picture: Flickr/HM Treasury)

The Labour conference in Liverpool this week should have been a victory party after Keir Starmer’s landslide win in the general election.

But the leader began his first party conference as prime minister much less confident and much less popular than he hoped. He faced a storm of anger over the tens of thousands of pounds worth of “donations” he trousered before the Labour conference had even begun. 

He tried to see off a backlash at chancellor Rachel Reeves snatching the winter fuel allowance from ten million pensioners. The Labour government is “not going down the road of austerity”, he protested, in a bid to diffuse pressure from some union leaders.

Millions of working class people voted for the Labour Party hoping for some change after 14 years of Tory austerity. Starmer and Reeves know that, but need to dash and deflect those hopes.

“Working people have paid the price for the Tory chaos,” said Reeves. The loudest cheers from delegates came when Reeves slammed the Tories for handing out corrupt contracts to corporations during Covid. “I won’t turn a blind eye to rip off artists and fraudsters,” she said.

“I won’t turn a blind eye as they line their own pockets. I won’t let them get away with that. That money belongs in our police, it belongs in our health service, and it belongs in our schools.”

She hopes that low to no-cost measures—such as appointing a Covid corruption commissioner to recover money from dodgy contracts—will show Labour has delivered some reforms.

However, the Labour government’s aim is to prove to big business that it will be a “responsible” manager of British capitalism. This means allowing the system to run without too many barriers to profit-making, such as a wealth tax on the superrich.

When Starmer and Reeves talk of sticking to the “fiscal rules”, they mean not breaking with the orthodoxy of free market economics.

She declared, “This is a changed Labour Party—not a party of protest,” while facing heckles from a Palestine campaigner. That was a dig at Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, which promised a return to social democratic policies.

Reeves defended slashing winter fuel payments was “the right decision in the circumstances we inherited”. She claims that Labour discovered a £22 billion “black hole” in Britain’s finances after the general election. 

“Labour will act and when the national interest demands hard choices, Labour will not duck them,” she said.

When Labour politicians talk of “hard choices”, they never mean taxing big business or the superrich.  They mean making working class people pay for the crisis.

But Labour is under pressure. The Unite and CWU unions put forward a motion calling on the Labour government to reverse the cuts to winter fuel allowance.

The Labour leadership made sure to suppress debate, relegating it to the “graveyard slot” on Wednesday.

Some delegates booed and heckled as the Labour conference arrangements committee chair Lynne Morris announced the motion wouldn’t be heard on Monday.

Sharon Graham, the Unite union general secretary, slammed the “blatant manoeuvre to block debate”. “It is fair to say that the Labour leaders have tried to silence the voice of pensioners, workers and communities,” she said.

“When this becomes widely known there will be real anger among everyday people—real anger.”

The vote would be non-binding, but would a be a symbolic blow to Starmer.

Graham said, “People voted for change. They need to see change. And he needs to reverse the winter fuel allowance decision and let people have that £300 they can put their heating on this winter.”

“The richest 50 families in Britain are worth £500 billion, and Labour decided to take money off pensioners rather than tax the richest? How is that decision made? Who makes that decision?”

Tensions between Labour and Unite this early into the Starmer’s government show how little it’s offering working class people. But unions will have to fight back to win more under Labour.

There were signs of how, under the surface appearance of class peace, there is an accumulated anger at years of austerity and privatisation.

Labour and the union leaders had pushed for workers to accept public sector pay settlements. As Reeves boasted of settling disputes, news came in that RCN nurses’ union members had overwhelmingly rejected a 5.5. percent pay increase.

The money’s there to pay for much more than what Labour’s offering—but unions have to fight for it.