Compass, the left-of-centre think tank, published polling yesterday on the opinion of Labour Party members that states a blunt truth, which is that the Labour government is out of step with its own grassroots.
And it is not just slightly out of step. On issue after issue, Labour members want bold, progressive action, but instead the government is delivering caution, compromise, or outright opposition.
In summary, the polling found that:
-
92% of Labour members want water in public ownership.
-
91% back wealth taxes on the richest.
-
89% want a fair migration system rooted in our tradition of welcome.
-
84% say stop arms sales to Israel to work toward a lasting ceasefire.
-
84% want the two-child benefit cap scrapped to cut child poverty.
-
75% want no new oil and gas licences.
-
74% say MPs should not lose the whip for opposing bad laws.
-
66% back proportional representation.
Vitally, these are not fringe demands. They are popular, credible policies that address the crises we face: inequality, climate breakdown, poverty, and democratic decline. They represent the politics of moral purpose.
So, what is the leadership's response?
- It is silent on public ownership.
- It has rejected wealth taxes.
- It is dog-whistling on migration.
- It is pursuing business as usual on arms sales to Israel.
- And it has issued a flat refusal to scrap the two-child limit.
- It has green-lighted new oil and gas.
- And it is punishing MPs for dissent.
- And all the while it is keeping proportional representation off the table, entirely.
This is not Labour's favourite old ploy of triangulation. Instead, it is capitulation. Labour is very obviously choosing to fight on the ground staked out by the right-wing press, the City, and fossil fuel interests, ceding territory on the left, which it is leaving entirely vacant, even though that is where its membership and much of the country are.
What has to be said is that there is a cost to this. Labour's members were not so very long ago the source of the party's energy. Now the leadership is ignoring them, and that energy is very obviously draining away. Without members, the centrally funded party machine might still stagger on, but it will be a hollow shell, and the public are already sensing that
The polling shows that there is an appetite for change amongst Labour's members that is real, urgent, and overwhelming. Despite that, the leadership is behaving as if it must keep the lid on any policy agenda, for fear of frightening any and all of the constituencies that the party must address if it is to succeed. The irony is that it is this timidity that most risks alienating voters. People know the country is broken. They want someone to fix it, not someone to politely manage the decline, and despite that, Labour is pointedly refusing to rise to the challenge.
So what should happen?
-
Labour should listen to the membership. No party can succeed without doing so, and those members are not asking for outlandish policies. Public ownership of water is about a clean, affordable supply. Wealth taxes are about balancing the fiscal cycle and reducing obscene inequality. Scrapping the two-child limit is the most cost-effective anti-poverty measure we have.
-
Labour should lead, and not follow. Waiting for the Daily Mail's permission to act is a fool's strategy for Labour, but it appears to be what they are doing. Bold action on climate, poverty, and democratic reform would easily win support if it was explained with clarity and conviction.
-
Make moral purpose the test of acceptability. If a policy leaves the poorest worse off, drives climate collapse, or concentrates power in fewer hands, it fails the test and should not happen. Is it really so hard for Labour to work that out?
The required choice is clear. Labour can be the government that confronts inequality, repairs our public services, and builds a democracy fit for the 21st century. Alternatively, it can be a government that gains power and then uses it to deliver minimal change, or even go backwards on those issues.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
On all of those areas I agree with the majority of Labour members. But if those are their views, they are a better fit with the Lib Dems or Greens leaders views than with current Labour leadership.
There were 2 council by-elections on Thursday, both won by the Green Party, lost by Labour.
I would suggest the Labour members call an emergency Conference to ask why the members views are not being represented. If they refuse to have the meeting then raise a Vote of No Confidence in the Labour Party leadership with a threat to unilaterally cancel their membership
Labour needs to remember that these members are the ones that they will need to honour in the streets to canvass support, drop leaflets and most importantly answer the difficult question of why aren’t Labour MPs behaving as Labour MPs !
The much depleted ranks of Labour members and grassroots supporters will likely get all that and more from ‘Your Party’. Whatever else happens, Your Party is going to be successful at exposing the hopeless busted flush that is the Labour Party.
Compass Survation poll in brief:-
https://d2uuuneafwcujf.cloudfront.net/images/2025/08/image-1.png
Thanks
I saw yesterday that sign-ups for Corbyn’s new party had passed three-quarters of a million people.
The Labour machine has been focussed for the last 10 years on suppressing the views of its membership at every level, from branch, through CLP, Region, candidate selection (Hi there Assaf Kaplan!), and now, by controlling delegate access to and participation in conference.
It is impossible to express dissent within Labour now.
Starmer promised us a grass-roots focussed party during his leadership campaign. He was of course, as always, lying.
I believe there are only two groups whom Starmer cannot currently control, his backbenchers (he can be challenged as leader by 80 backbenchers), and the trade union part of Labour (the key being Unite).
A rebellion COULD happen, but I dont think either group have the moral courage or clarity of vision. If complicity in war crimes didn’t provoke action, what will?
There will be noise but the Labour jackboot will come down, yet again, at conference. Perhaps a token balcony banner protest involving cardboard and Sharpie pens this year? Another nonogenarian Holocaust survivor carted away in handcuffs? LINO at its dictatorial best…
If there is not dramatic change at conference, and I don’t think there will be, then Unions should disaffiliate, and members should resign. Their energy and cash is needed elsewhere.
Much to agree with
I agree entirely. Once upon a time Conference was the sovereign body of the Labour Party. Of course the result always involved a massive behind the scenes attempt at watering down anything deemed to radical – but it did at least maintain the illusion that it was worth being a member. But all that became dead and buried long ago.
But \I do think we should really be focussing our attention on the Unions. MMT provides the answers to the questions thrown by the media at everyone from General Secretaries down to rank and file members on the picket line. They need the ammunition.
At the moment no MP is going to reply to any “but where’s the money going to come from” question with anything other than blaming the other lot. And neither are they going to write a newspaper article pointing out that the emperor has no clothes. But a Sharon Graham, or a Mick Lynch, or someone from the BMA, that would be another matter – provided they were onside….
It would be great to get them on board
If most Labour MP’s had any common sense they’d recognise Starmer for what he is an autocrat and a demagogue and get rid of him!
Good to see that LINO members mostly align with what this blog has been saying.
You are comitting a category error.
LINO members are a fig leaf – to lend some leigitimacy to a political party that is there to deliver wealth for those at the top that control the party.
The political structures in LINO are designed to neutralise/negate what the members think – in effect they are drones (= powerless) – they do what the pheremones of the assorted queens tell them.
LINO is, supposedly, a party of the people but delivers benefits for a few dozen whilst still putting out traditional Labour propaganda.
The kindest thing that could happen to LINO is its total destruction @ the ballot box. The moment of truth (Wales and Scotland elections) approaches. I hope citizens recognise that LINO (like the equally ghastly Tories) is dead. Why vote for a dead party? Change of party leader? pointless under the current system – just get another ghastly Starmer-type – because that is the way LINO is structured. Labour delenda est.
Unfair to drones. Bees do vital work, unlike the Labour MPs carefully selected for their obsequiousness.
There are some still who support Labour the party blindly and see dissent as betrayal. They will carry on until the end
But the tent it very much smaller, and the number of people ejected from it means that new tents are viable.
It may be Starmer’s legacy to revive the left in a new populist left wing party. And the current Labour will end up a husk like the Coonservatives are now.
I know a few in that first week: I find them very odd now.
Totally agree with what you’re saying here.
All these policies could be enacted through a program focussed on passing legislation that achieves least harm, and measured with something other than GDP. Maybe reducing average stress across the population, or increasing average happiness/contentment. Productivity increases would likely follow.
Eg – public ownership of utilities: increase resilience via infrastructure spending, limit bill increases – Population have more disposable income, less financial stress, hope of improvement over time.
Higher taxes on passive income – lower inequality, less “them and us” division, happier population, less resentment at working all day so that 90% of your output goes to paying shareholder dividends, increased productivity.
Selling arms to bad actors – kill less innocent people.
Maybe all a bit simplistic but would certainly work better than hammering people via extractive rents, murdering loads of innocent civilians, polluting and baking the planet for (really minor) short term gains.
Bearing in mind the huge number of ex Labour members, this is a poll of the rump, including many who support Starmer. That has to make the PLP think, surely?
Locally to me there was a Newcastle council by-election in South Jesmond. Greens beat Lib Dems by 55 votes. 578 votes to 523. Lab third with 267, Reform 4th with 173. Cons got 45. In May 2024 Lab had won with 42.1%. Now they have 16.8!
The times, they are a changin’
Good, serves ‘useless, useless labour ‘ right. Excellent to see the greens win.
And great to see the effing tories getting bugger all.
There is and always will be a tension between Party members and the Parliamentary Party. This is certainly true for Conservative and Labour Parties… and others, too, I suspect.
Members have ideals/principles, MPs need to get elected…. and the process of “triangulation” (whatever that actually means) begins. Too extreme and spend a generation in opposition; too accommodating to opposing views and “what’s the point?”. Trying to do this is entirely reasonable – after all “Politics is the art of the possible” (as Harold Macmillan said).
But your observation – “This is not Labour’s favourite old ploy of triangulation. Instead, it is capitulation. ” – hits the nail on the head. As a Labour Party member I just don’t understand why capitulate? Why?
I wish I could answer that, and apart from their greed, I have no answer.
Why capitulate?
OK – I’ll offer this.
It is absolutely true that the Tory party left the country in a right mess.
The Tories knew what they were doing. This is why I despise them and hate them so much. I mean, really. The Tories effectively punished the British people for having the temerity for not voting for them. The Tories from 2010 were all about petty revenge. They had lots of fun.
Even if Labour had no issues with MMT, tax to control inflation, sovereignty over the currency and the BoE, it would still face having to initiate a programme of national rebuilding that – subject to capacity constraints – would take it well beyond one term in power. Labour it is fair to say are rather overwhelmed, not helped by a civil service that seems hell bent on or not having any capacity for growing State involvement in anything unless it is giving stuff away to the private sector. Ergo – the CS skill set is divestment, not investment.
But Labour DO constrain themselves by adopting Thatcherite nonsense about ‘tax payers’ money – so when we add that into the mix, to me the question of capitulation becomes more realistic. But there is more of course:
1. The people you have – Starmer is a knight of the realm – we know where his fealty is.
2. The MSM will not help the Labour government and will attack any effort to improve matters.
3. You have a generation of politicians brought up under Thatcherism as a reality, not as an ideology, coming into politics already constrained, lacking the tools to improve things.
4. You have the ongoing influence of New Labour which cannot be understated. New Labour was the de-politicization of politics and sanitisation of markets, anti-democratic sofa government, policy without ethics, results without process or oversight.
I am not excusing Labour. In 2003 when my final salary pension was destroyed, they lost my vote then because I knew then that they were not for ‘working people’.
We here have been unlucky to have born in another cycle of human history where humanity is set to descend into the abyss. The stories we tell of how this happened now may be useful for those who lift humanity out of it in the cycle sometime in the future. I hope so.
Why are you still a party member?
Good question, I do wonder sometimes.
I think the best chance of altering government policy (which is, surely, the aim) is to alter Labour Party policy. Now, this may look pretty unlikely at present but I feel it more likely to be successful than (say) joining a new party of the left. A new party of the left might (only might) bring Labour back in that direction but will almost certainly split the progressive vote and allow Tories/Reform to win.
Second, I stood a a Labour Candidate aged 11 in a mock election at school in 1974 (and lost heavily) so 50 years of inertia/tribalism etc. keeps me in. (Not a great reason, perhaps, but still a reason).
Now, if we get PR then I would change my support in a heartbeat.
Clive, you can vote for labour as the best option but don’t have to be a member. As a member you are supporting Starmer in his denigration of the membership.
The latest is that they are already interviewing people to stand instead of Diane Abbott even before they have concluded the investigation into her.
They have got rid of half the membership anyway.
My MP, Luke Akehurst, wanted to take her place at the last election. No doubt his name will be on the list to replace her, particularly as he is despised up here by the membership, but they didn’t have a say in who stood here.
We actually produced a leaflet telling voters why they should not vote for him, and put them through people’s doors.
I had been a member before you stood as a candidate in your school. My husband stood to be a labour councillor when we lived in Hampshire. He doubled the vote, to over 100!
After Blair lied about Iraq I left the party, joining again when Corbyn stood for leader in 2015. I believed Starmer when he said he would follow the ten rules. I didn’t vote for him, but I believed him. However, when he showed such contempt for the party, not just Corbyn, etc., but the ordinary membership, the people who knock on doors for the party, there is no way now I could do that honestly. I feel disgust for people who do. They must know by now what Starmer feels about them. They must know he does not care for them or anyone else for that matter, apart from Trump and Netanyahu. They must know he’s a zionist.
Luke Akehurst was one of those who conspired against Corbyn and others to be removed from the party, and is still doing so.
Sorry if this offends you, but it’s how I feel. I very rarely discuss politics any more in real life unless it’s with people I know feel the same as me.
re splitting the progressive vote: while that has been a legitimate concern in the past we have surely arrived at a point where the Labour Party can not realistically be described as progressive. As we have seen over the last year they can bring themselves to do very little that can be described as progressive. In many ways they are no better than the Tories, and in some respects they are worse than the Tories. It’d be nice if we could rely on a resurgence of progressive vibes and action if there were a change of leadership, but that is only a theoretical possibility and they have purged so many progressives leaving the LP dominated by those with a right wing, non-progressive outlook. I really don’t think it’s going to happen, and certainly not before the next General Election. There are also signs that Your Party could take votes off Reform too – not all Reform supporters are fascists. Many have resorted to Reform in desperation for change – any change better than the unacceptable status quo. So a progressive alternative to the Labour Party could be appealing to some of them too. For too long the Labour Party has relied upon progressive voters having nowhere else to go, which is no longer the case. If Zach Polanski gets elected leader of the Greens next month he will also be making a lot of noise, so the progressive agenda will be percolating more into mainstream consciousness from that direction too.
I agree re Labour.
And Polanski worries me in some ways. What if he is not elected? What if the Greens opt for the comfy armchair approach instead?
JenW, No offence taken… and I will ponder your thoughts.
Labour has ceded so much to the deep, entrenched establishment running our country that it is just a husk of a party at the top lying to its membership. It needs to be put out of its misery. But the prospect of fascism coming in to replace it?
I’m not sure if it is now just inevitable and that we are set to have to through a period of fascism and let time be the revelator.
The lesson? In politics – which has actually failed – read Chantal Mouffe – the lesson is not backing down on what you know about human frailties and seeking compromise and win/win scenarios and keep arguing the point to keep some sort of balance.
Greed is a frailty.
Desiring exclusive power is a frailty.
Using power and democracy to achieve you own ends is frailty.
There are quite a few more frailties this blog could mention – but they need managing, controlling curbing, limiting – however you want to put it. The best tool to manage them is robust politics – arguing, debating, evaluating.
We need politics back badly because I do not think it is there anymore in a way that is useful.
As a member of Compass and as someone who’s been disenfranchised by FPTP his entire life, the above survey makes complete sense to me.
It really is quite extraordinary that labour has no desire or intention to do anything about electoral reform, or indeed most of the other issues on that list. They seem to be obsessed with right wingers and what they want whilst treating left wing voters and left wing parties with contempt and dislike.
As an example, the pathetic ‘message from No10’ sent out last week in advance of the entirety peaceful demonstration in support of PA warning people not to attend whilst, AFAIK no such message has been sent to the far right thugs, racists and the fools stupid enough to believe their social media lies who have been violently demonstrating in Epping against people seeking refuge in the UK.
No steer Kier, the captain of HMS Dither. The lead ship in a flotilla comprising HMS Clueless, HMS Cowardice and HMS Prevaricate.
Robust politics? Keir Starmer would rather run a mile or more than have that! He couldn’t hack it having a majority disagree with him. That’s why he has to behave insidiously to get his own way. The original snake in the grass! I’ve no respect for him and now a lot of voters are starting to recognise this and feel the same way.
Many Labour members of my acquaintance are now ex members. Personally I jumped ship many years ago due to Labour, when out of power, supporting Tory Government participation in armed interventions.
Richard,
Could you please make sure that Anthony Albanese of the Australian Labor (sic) Party reads this. Seems he and Starmer are singing off the same hymn sheet. Massive majority and doing nothing.
I resigned from the Labour Psrty on z Monday and this was my letter of resignation.
Dear Kevin and others
After 53years of active membership of the Labour Party, I have come to the conclusion that that it is no longer my political home.
Since the election of Tony Blair as leader the Party has moved further and further away from its explicit aim of having working class representation in all seats of power, to the point at which very few MPs have come from the shop floor as trade union activists and an ever increasing number have come from Oxbridge and been forced on CLPs without democratic process. The result is an ever increasing gap, or social distance between those running the Party and the people it was established to represent, giving space for the far right to successfully establish a base in working class communities, because let’s face it we have allowed them to be come powerless. I can see no possibility that the Labour leadership are going to change this.
In short the Labour Party has ceased to exist.
Several straws have finally broken my back
The undemocratic imposition of Micheal Mordey.
The undemocratic imposition of of MPs such as Luke Akhurst over good local candidates.
The continuation of Thatcherite economic policies which have been show to increase the wealth of the few over the many.
The instincts showed by the current leadership to attack the poor and the ill before taxing the rich.
A leader who has lied to gain power.
MPs who are too weak to call out these lies.
The failure to remove, or show any sign of removing the limitations on the rights to protest, brought in by the previous government.
A leadership playing to the right wing agenda on International affairs, especially its failure to condemn the slaughter in Gaza and the ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, until it was forced to by the actions of other countries.
The appeasement of authoritarian leaders such as Trump.
The planned change to funding which would, if implemented, lead to Sunderland facing significant cuts in basic services.
The removal of the duelling of the A1 from any future road building plans, leaving the region even further behind the richer south.
The arrests of over 450 peaceful demonstrators, sending a chilling message to those who want to see the right to peaceful protest defended.
1/2
2/2
The watering down of the green agenda.
There are many other issues which I could have listed, but I think you the points made above show the the Labour Party of today is and will continue to be, a right of centre, neoliberal, authoritarian organisation, which no longer has any belief in being a member lead democratic organisation, in which the members are important and not just a fan club.
Please accept this email as my formal resignation from member Of the Labour Party.
With deep sadness and regret.
Dave Marshall
Thank you
And noted
Spot on, David, from another Sunderland lad.
I left the party in February for the reasons you stated.