Manifesto week – full of sound and fury

13 June 2024 | Admin

It’s been a busy, noisy few days. Manifesto week always is. The launch of a party’s programme for government is a critical moment in an election – a manifesto that lands badly can send a campaign into crisis. The Conservative offering in 2017, with its notorious social care policy quickly dubbed the ‘dementia tax’, unravelled and was changed after just four days. The campaign never recovered and the Tories lost their majority.

Given the significance of manifesto launches, it’s no surprise that the week’s been full of sound and fury. But amidst the claim and counter-claim, it’s worth taking time to reflect on two key questions: what more do we know and has it changed anything?

First, we need to consider the content of the manifestos. For seasoned watchers of Labour and Tory policy on planning, infrastructure and the built environment, reading the manifestos is rather like revisiting a familiar novel – an exercise in reacquaintance with known language and ideas. For the Tories this means a reaffirmation of green belt sanctity, a focus on brownfield-first, commitment to Freeports and Investment Zones, and support for ‘pride of place’ in local high streets. For Labour, the document includes  well-trodden pledges on unlocking ‘grey belt’ land, undertaking planning reform to kick-start growth, and devolution of skills, housing and transport powers to Mayors.

The lack of surprises is understandable – both parties are operating within a tight fiscal envelope, the Conservatives are seeking to defend their record, and Labour is cautiously trying to protect a large polling lead. In Labour’s case in particular, the manifesto even includes less detail in some areas than previously announced policy. For instance, it does not put a timescale on the publication of the promised business tax roadmap; as late as last week Labour’s External Relations team was sharing policy documents that committed to producing the strategy within the first six months of the party entering government.

This lack, or even removal, of detail should not be assumed to reflect a dearth of ideas or a change of heart. Governments always do things that go beyond their manifesto, and parties always want to strike a balance between depth of thought and clarity of communication. So while the lack of detail is frustrating for those of us in industry who want certainty, it is an inevitable conclusion of the election strategy approaches the parties have taken.

The private sector’s concern over the continued uncertainty over Labour’s plans for reform were illustrated neatly by the market reaction to the party’s manifesto launch. Several major housebuilders’ shares fell upon the announcement, with concern particularly focussing on the wide scope for interpretation of Labour’s policy on land market reform, which pledges that “for specific types of development schemes, landowners are awarded fair compensation rather than inflated prices based on the prospect of planning permission”.

So what’s changed? We’ve learned little more about the major policy ambitions of either main party. And it’s also true that the launches, and the associated media mud-slinging, have not to date produced any significant movement in the polls. But this doesn’t mean that this week has been inconsequential to the state of the race. Manifesto launches are critical moments in any election campaign which generate huge attention and dominate the news cycle. Along with other major set-piece events like TV debates, they are one of the few moments which can actually change voters’ minds and possibly even reshape the race. So a manifesto week that does not shift the polls or narratives of the election race is one fewer opportunity for a party that is behind in the polls to change its fortunes. And by that metric, Keir Starmer will be the happiest of the candidates for Prime Minister going into the last 20 days of the campaign.