It's as yet unknown whether Reform's failings will lead to a better debate about how to fund social care. Or whether the public will simply blame just another set of incompetent politicians.

This misunderstanding makes it difficult to have an informed democratic debate about what we do about social care. It meant Reform councils could claim they would cut spending dramatically through cutting bureaucracy, when admin is only responsible for a small part of council budgets.

Not in very many seats. Even the most catastrophic MRPs for Labour have the Lib Dems and Greens picking up few seats.

In Wales and Scotland, they may not be seen as the main opponents to Reform, but in England, in most seats, they will be.

One year into a Parliamentary term, we can't regard MRPs as a prediction, but it is still striking that so many of Labour's core seats - which even in a disastrous defeat, the party would hold - are in London. And most of the others are in other major cities or in commutable areas around them.

Oh yes I know! I've been a delegate enough times. It was looking at the audience in the fringe events, which seemed proportionately less full of ordinary members than usual, which led to my initial observation.

Got to say this time around it felt more like lobbyists talking to other lobbyists plus some journos, rather than an event centered around activist engagement.

That is fairly terrifying, if true. Given the stakes.

They don't seem to have moved (enough) onto the "Reform's economic policies are batshit" part. Which would be a crucial part of that plan.

Genuinely, what *do* they do about the haemorrhage to Reform?

A major point here, is that older working class people are by and large *not* in the poorest half of society. They tend to have good pensions and own their own houses outright and consequently are economically (as well as culturally) right wing and therefore have little interest in voting Labour.

Interestingly it *is* very much working people, if you define them as "people of working age who draw their income from employment". Even Corbyn in 2019 won the plurality of people of working age. In 2024 more people of working age with an income over £100k voted Labour than Tory.

Though... Anecdotally, there are some on the far right, who are happy to admit they are racist, but vehemently reject the label "far right" - presumably because they want to believe that racism is mainstream.

And it will definitely not be popular among the subset of voters who are likely to ever consider voting Labour. Unlike the Tories, Labour doesn't have to win over the minority with *extremely* hard-line views, just those who want a system that feels fairer and under control.

Always angers me that Hunt is treated as a sensible moderate when he was responsible for that utterly cynical move on tax - which is a major cause of the dreadful and damaging fiscal position the country is now.

I don't think it would solve the whole problem by any means, but suspect it might persuade some of those - particularly the relatively small number who voted Lab in 24 and have switched to Reform, to look again at the government. (Though timescales a problem here).

People who vote Reform aren't necessarily badly off themselves but do tend to live in run down areas with low house prices and poor public services. Improving services, infrastructure and the public realm in those areas could help.

Thank you for this Ally. It means a lot that you are speaking out on this.

Of course. Makes perfect sense.

I wonder if she genuinely doesn't remember that she did the energy thing.