“The journey of being in government is that you start at your most popular and least capable, and you end at your most capable and least popular,” former Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair has reflected in his years since leaving office. Blair often bemoans his failure to capitalise on the vast political capital from his landslide election in his first term, believing that he only started to make meaningful strides – on public service reform in particular – at the start of his second.
Here lies a crucial lesson for Keir Starmer and the Labour Party, who on July 5 may find themselves in a similar position with Labour’s mandate looking set to rival Blair’s unprecedented result in 1997. No doubt today’s Labour will be conscious to play this down and manage expectations – particularly in light of the daunting in-tray that awaits the new government – but they should also be alive to the enormity of the opportunity it presents. This is a chance to leverage its moment of maximum political capital to embark on bold, contentious policies – such as delivering planning reform – and to rethink the way the country is governed.
So how can Labour make best use of its moment of triumph? The latest briefing from The Future Governance Forum, 100 Four 100, sets out a series of steps the new government can take to set itself up for success in its first 100 hours, four weeks, and 100 days.
The pressure to start delivering from day one will be immense. After a gruelling six-week campaign, the government will have to quickly find its footing amidst a dizzying overnight transition and with a relatively inexperienced team (85% of Labour’s frontbench have never been ministers). This will be compounded by the need to play catch-up after an unusually brief window for civil service access talks. But getting these first 100 days right will be vital – and could mean the difference between laying a strong foundation for the term ahead or spending the following years regretting the opportunities missed early on and making up for lost time.
Setting the tone
New Labour’s first 100 days featured a blitz of policy announcements, guided by a meticulously crafted first 100 day ‘route map’ developed by chief of staff Jonathan Powell. The plan helped the new government navigate the high-risk post-election period, buying it time to find its footing. Alongside mapping out its first 100 days however, a newly elected government should also have a plan for its crucial first 100 hours in office when initial impressions are formed in the minds of the civil service, the markets, stakeholders from businesses to unions to civil society, and of course the electorate.
On May 6 1997 – day four of the new government – Gordon Brown shocked city analysts, the lobby, and even civil servants by announcing he was to free the Bank of England’s interest setting powers from political interference. Labour’s manifesto had not directly addressed this – the party feared that to do so would lead to resistance from civil servants and attacks focused on interest rate rises from the Conservatives.
Bank of England independence was more than just a policy announcement however; it was also a hugely symbolic moment for the New Labour project. By making its first economic decision the ceding of power, it signalled a decisive break from traditional Labour economic thinking that gave credence to the fabled ‘New Labour’ slogan, setting the tone for a modernising first term agenda. The context today is different, but the lesson is the same: a new government should craft a compelling story from day one. Should Labour win power on Thursday, it should use its first 100 hours to spell out clearly what it intends to do with that power.
Bank of England independence was effective politics in that it created a clear dividing line with the Conservatives, positioning Labour as the party of economic competence and framing the Conservatives – still tainted by the Black Wednesday crisis of 1992 and accusations of interest rate meddling for political ends – as economically irresponsible. This narrative was carried through the first term, later becoming the cornerstone of Labour’s 2001 re-election campaign. The first 100 hours should not just be about policy delivery; they are the opening salvo of the next election campaign.
Establishing a new way of governing
As they step into government, incoming ministers and advisors must ready themselves for an abrupt shift from life in opposition. Overnight, previously tight-knit teams are dispersed across Whitehall and forced to communicate through their private offices. One immediate task is deciding which cultures and working practices to carry over from opposition into government. New Labour’s inner circle initially embraced a more informal approach to decision-making, ways of working, and even dress code. The May 1997 transition therefore marked a huge cultural shift in how government was conducted – one which senior civil servants have since reflected they much underestimated at the time.
This time, however, Labour’s approach to statecraft is likely to be quite different from 1997. The party has placed plans for a mission-driven government at the heart of its manifesto and has promised “the biggest ever transfer of power from Westminster to the British people.” This is the right response to the scale of the challenges and opportunities facing an incoming British government in 2024. Tweaks to the prevailing system won’t do; the present moment demands a new approach where the administration leads with purpose and governs in partnership.
All of this is a far cry from Blair’s ‘sofa government’ approach where power lay with a small coterie of advisors. If Labour in 2024 is serious about changing how Britain is governed, that work must be embedded in first 100 day planning, with symbolic early actions – such as introducing ‘mission boards’ chaired by the PM with participants from across sectors and tiers of government, as recently reported in the FT – that signal to the civil service that it is serious about doing things differently. However, as former Deputy Cabinet Minister Helen MacNamara reminds us in her recent blog for FGF on the civil service view of mission-driven government, the new administration should also be cautious about over-engineering the machinery of government.
Finally, it is worth noting that despite some successes, Blair’s first 100 days were far from plain sailing, with the new government having to navigate its way through scandal, four interest rate hikes, and culminating in the Uxbridge by-election, which returned a Conservative MP with an increased majority. Events, inevitably, will prevail, testing the mettle and agility of the new government. But that is not to say a new government should arrive underprepared. As Dwight D. Eisenhower put it, “the plan is nothing; planning is everything.”
Read ‘100 Four 100: How a new government can set itself up for success‘, written by FGF’s Adam Terry and Phil Tinline.
And for more FGF work on the transition to power, explore Into Power 01: Lessons from Australia and the United States and Into Power 02: The Conservative Party’s 2010 transition from opposition to government, which examine what can be learnt from past handovers of power both in the UK and overseas.
What Keir Starmer can learn from Blair’s first 100 days
Research and Communications Officer
“The journey of being in government is that you start at your most popular and least capable, and you end at your most capable and least popular,” former Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair has reflected in his years since leaving office. Blair often bemoans his failure to capitalise on the vast political capital from his landslide election in his first term, believing that he only started to make meaningful strides – on public service reform in particular – at the start of his second.
Here lies a crucial lesson for Keir Starmer and the Labour Party, who on July 5 may find themselves in a similar position with Labour’s mandate looking set to rival Blair’s unprecedented result in 1997. No doubt today’s Labour will be conscious to play this down and manage expectations – particularly in light of the daunting in-tray that awaits the new government – but they should also be alive to the enormity of the opportunity it presents. This is a chance to leverage its moment of maximum political capital to embark on bold, contentious policies – such as delivering planning reform – and to rethink the way the country is governed.
So how can Labour make best use of its moment of triumph? The latest briefing from The Future Governance Forum, 100 Four 100, sets out a series of steps the new government can take to set itself up for success in its first 100 hours, four weeks, and 100 days.
The pressure to start delivering from day one will be immense. After a gruelling six-week campaign, the government will have to quickly find its footing amidst a dizzying overnight transition and with a relatively inexperienced team (85% of Labour’s frontbench have never been ministers). This will be compounded by the need to play catch-up after an unusually brief window for civil service access talks. But getting these first 100 days right will be vital – and could mean the difference between laying a strong foundation for the term ahead or spending the following years regretting the opportunities missed early on and making up for lost time.
Setting the tone
New Labour’s first 100 days featured a blitz of policy announcements, guided by a meticulously crafted first 100 day ‘route map’ developed by chief of staff Jonathan Powell. The plan helped the new government navigate the high-risk post-election period, buying it time to find its footing. Alongside mapping out its first 100 days however, a newly elected government should also have a plan for its crucial first 100 hours in office when initial impressions are formed in the minds of the civil service, the markets, stakeholders from businesses to unions to civil society, and of course the electorate.
On May 6 1997 – day four of the new government – Gordon Brown shocked city analysts, the lobby, and even civil servants by announcing he was to free the Bank of England’s interest setting powers from political interference. Labour’s manifesto had not directly addressed this – the party feared that to do so would lead to resistance from civil servants and attacks focused on interest rate rises from the Conservatives.
Bank of England independence was more than just a policy announcement however; it was also a hugely symbolic moment for the New Labour project. By making its first economic decision the ceding of power, it signalled a decisive break from traditional Labour economic thinking that gave credence to the fabled ‘New Labour’ slogan, setting the tone for a modernising first term agenda. The context today is different, but the lesson is the same: a new government should craft a compelling story from day one. Should Labour win power on Thursday, it should use its first 100 hours to spell out clearly what it intends to do with that power.
Bank of England independence was effective politics in that it created a clear dividing line with the Conservatives, positioning Labour as the party of economic competence and framing the Conservatives – still tainted by the Black Wednesday crisis of 1992 and accusations of interest rate meddling for political ends – as economically irresponsible. This narrative was carried through the first term, later becoming the cornerstone of Labour’s 2001 re-election campaign. The first 100 hours should not just be about policy delivery; they are the opening salvo of the next election campaign.
Establishing a new way of governing
As they step into government, incoming ministers and advisors must ready themselves for an abrupt shift from life in opposition. Overnight, previously tight-knit teams are dispersed across Whitehall and forced to communicate through their private offices. One immediate task is deciding which cultures and working practices to carry over from opposition into government. New Labour’s inner circle initially embraced a more informal approach to decision-making, ways of working, and even dress code. The May 1997 transition therefore marked a huge cultural shift in how government was conducted – one which senior civil servants have since reflected they much underestimated at the time.
This time, however, Labour’s approach to statecraft is likely to be quite different from 1997. The party has placed plans for a mission-driven government at the heart of its manifesto and has promised “the biggest ever transfer of power from Westminster to the British people.” This is the right response to the scale of the challenges and opportunities facing an incoming British government in 2024. Tweaks to the prevailing system won’t do; the present moment demands a new approach where the administration leads with purpose and governs in partnership.
All of this is a far cry from Blair’s ‘sofa government’ approach where power lay with a small coterie of advisors. If Labour in 2024 is serious about changing how Britain is governed, that work must be embedded in first 100 day planning, with symbolic early actions – such as introducing ‘mission boards’ chaired by the PM with participants from across sectors and tiers of government, as recently reported in the FT – that signal to the civil service that it is serious about doing things differently. However, as former Deputy Cabinet Minister Helen MacNamara reminds us in her recent blog for FGF on the civil service view of mission-driven government, the new administration should also be cautious about over-engineering the machinery of government.
Finally, it is worth noting that despite some successes, Blair’s first 100 days were far from plain sailing, with the new government having to navigate its way through scandal, four interest rate hikes, and culminating in the Uxbridge by-election, which returned a Conservative MP with an increased majority. Events, inevitably, will prevail, testing the mettle and agility of the new government. But that is not to say a new government should arrive underprepared. As Dwight D. Eisenhower put it, “the plan is nothing; planning is everything.”
Read ‘100 Four 100: How a new government can set itself up for success‘, written by FGF’s Adam Terry and Phil Tinline.
And for more FGF work on the transition to power, explore Into Power 01: Lessons from Australia and the United States and Into Power 02: The Conservative Party’s 2010 transition from opposition to government, which examine what can be learnt from past handovers of power both in the UK and overseas.
You might also be interested in
FGF’s new Business Panel brings business leaders and policymakers together to tackle the country’s big challenges
How design capabilities could help the government deliver their national missions
Announcing the Social Insights Panel: A new FGF project led by Polly Neate
One leader’s reflections on moving from the civil service to civil society