Things can only get better? Starmer victory recalls run-up to 1997 and all that

After disastrous losses for the Tories in two out of three by-elections, today feels much more like the run-up to Blair’s era-defining 1997 triumph than the abject defeat of 1992, writes Andrew Grice

Starmer’s allies insist that both Selby and Uxbridge vindicate his strategy (PA Wire)

Conservative MPs grasping for crumbs of comfort have pointed out that by-election defeats like their historic one to Labour in Selby and Ainsty on Thursday are often reversed at the subsequent general election.

Some Tory minds turned to the 1987-1992 parliament, during which the party lost four seats to Labour and three to the Liberal Democrats in by-elections but won all seven back at the 1992 general election, helping John Major to pull off a surprise victory.

This spin might raise the Tories’ spirits, but it doesn’t get them very far. It’s not a rule: in the 1992-1997 parliament, the Tories lost four seats to the Lib Dems and three to Labour in by-elections, but won back only one (Christchurch) at the 1997 election, when Tony Blair won a thumping 179 majority.

No one in Labour land is talking about a landslide, because Keir Starmer needs a swing as big as Blair’s in 1997 to secure a Commons majority of just one. But today feels much more like the run-up to 1997 than 1992.

The governing Tories look exhausted and out of ideas after a long spell in power, and have thrown away their reputation for economic competence. The Labour leadership, after four crushing general election defeats, has changed the party, marginalised the left, and is ruthlessly wooing voters who switched to the Tories rather than playing to the Labour crowd. Indeed, the surprisingly friendly message on the doorstep in Selby reminded some Labour figures of the warm greetings they received in unexpected places in 1997. The result is remarkable because the North Yorkshire seat was 237th on the party’s general election target list.

Labour strategists knew all along that the swing they would secure in Uxbridge would be smaller than that in Selby, but for much of the campaigns they believed that the party would win narrowly in Uxbridge and lose in Selby. As time passed, its prospects in Selby got better, and resources were diverted to the seat. In Uxbridge, the London mayor Sadiq Khan’s expansion of his ultra-low-emission zone (Ulez), for cars not meeting emissions standards, gifted the Conservatives a powerful single-issue campaign.

Starmer’s internal critics will argue that the lesson from Uxbridge is that he is not offering voters enough hope, and that sitting on the fence (as he did on Ulez) has painful consequences. Doubts about Starmer’s personal appeal, and the impression that he lacks Blair’s charisma, will linger.

However, Uxbridge also allows Starmer to reinforce his “no complacency” message to his party. Rishi Sunak argued today that the general election is not “a done deal”.  For once, Starmer would agree. “It certainly feels more like 1997 than 1992, but it’s not full-on 1997 yet,” said one Labour insider.

Starmer’s allies insist that both Selby and Uxbridge vindicate his strategy. As one told me: “Uxbridge demonstrates it is right for Starmer to confront the ‘vanguardists’ and evangelists in the party who think it’s fine to go ahead of the electorate and assume the voters will just realise their mistakes and catch up.”

Uxbridge will fuel Labour’s lively internal debate about green issues. The Starmer ally described the result as “a huge shot of reality” for “those who are driving green policies ahead of the public and expecting them to dig deep into their pockets to pay for them”. In a sideswipe at the shadow climate secretary, they added: “Ulez will come to represent a massive cold bath for Ed Milibandism.”

Right-wing Tories believe Uxbridge offers a pointer for how to revive their party’s fortunes: campaigning against what David Cameron called the “green crap”. Sunak might be tempted, but I suspect the real problem in Uxbridge was extending the £12.50-a-day Ulez charge during a cost of living crisis. He should not read too much into it at a time when the climate crisis is rising up the public’s list of concerns amid daily evidence of it on our news bulletins.

Sunak would have taken a 2-1 defeat before Thursday’s results – much better than a 3-0 drubbing. But he should be very worried by what Selby tells us about Labour’s revival – and by the Liberal Democrats’ latest triumph in Somerton and Frome. The Lib Dems can now dream of sweet revenge on the Tories, who secretly plotted against their then coalition “partners” to seize Lib Dem seats in the South West at the 2015 election and won a majority. That is very bad news for Sunak.

Despite Labour’s triumph in Selby, the looming by-election Starmer cares most about hasn’t happened yet. He believes it is vital that Labour should win in Rutherglen and Hamilton West, where the SNP has a 5,230 majority over his party. The contest, expected in October, follows the former SNP MP Margaret Ferrier’s suspension from the Commons for 30 days for breaching Covid rules.

If Labour loses, its hopes of a revival in Scotland will lie in ruins. Starmer hopes the SNP’s implosion will allow Labour, which currently holds just one seat north of the border, to capture up to 20 SNP-held seats at the general election. Crucially, that would ease the pressure on Labour to land hard-to-win seats in England. As one Labour frontbencher put it: “We simply have to pass this test.”