A populist Autumn Budget, a refreshing reshuffle bringing new talent to the fore, and a King’s Speech packed with compelling ‘retail politics’: the stuff of lazy afternoon dreams for a languid Labour Government in the dog days of summer, perhaps.

But one thing is for certain – this is a Government in need of a relaunch, and these three political set-pieces present the best immediate opportunity for Labour to reset the narrative surrounding its first term in office.

So, what can the Government do with each of these opportunities to secure the critical cut-through it badly needs?

Cry me a river – the fiscal woes besetting the Chancellor

Most estimates are for the Autumn Budget to take place between the last week of October to the first week of November. Last year, the statement was delivered to the House on 30 October 2024.

It will need to be a bravura performance by the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves: increasingly gloomy fiscal and economic forecasts point to limited wiggle room for policy plays just when they are needed most. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research this month reported that the Treasury’s £9.9bn ‘headroom’ in the public finances had all disappeared and is set to miss her fiscal stability rule by a hefty £41.2bn.

NIESR’s analysis is apposite: “One year after the General Election, the Government still lacks a guiding narrative that can anchor a more ambitious policy programme. A total of £113 billion worth of public investment announced in the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) on 11 June is welcome. But the economic policy debate focuses too much on the instruments of fiscal policy and not enough on the outcomes for UK households, regions and sectors.”

The report also identified the “impossible trilemma” for no.11 of trying to meet fiscal targets, sticking to manifesto spending promises, and avoiding the tax increases on “working people” the Government has sworn against. Where can she turn?

• Cash ISA limits: Reeves was thought to be considering reducing the allowance for tax-free cash savings, but the banks, building societies and consumer campaigners won the lobby battle and the proposals were put on hold. Encouraging more retail investment in stocks and shares (possibly through ISAs) is certainly a key priority for the Treasury, but it given July’s backlash, it would be a big decision to announce anything that reduces the attractiveness of cash ISAs alongside this.
• Wealth Tax: There is flirtation with this idea in different wings of the left, whether it be Sultana/Corbyn’s ‘Party McPartyface’, the Greens’ new management, the influential Liam Byrne MP or former Party Leader Lord Kinnock himself. Instead of raising rates of income tax, a wealth tax would target accumulated assets, with most proponents arguing for a 2% tax on assets over £10m, which could raise an estimated £12-24bn. To pick on a wealth tax would be an extremely surprising shift for Reeves and Starmer after the months of growth and wealth-creation rhetoric. The idea was also publicly slapped down by Cabinet heavy-hitter, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds MP.
• Capital Gains Tax: Labour has already raised the rate of CGT, increasing the threshold to 18% for basic rate taxpayers and 24% for higher rate taxpayers back in March. However, Reeves does retain the option to raise CGT rates further to bring them in line with income tax, which could raise up to £12bn.
• Inheritance Tax: with Environment Secretary Steve Reed MP toughing out an IHT row with farmers, would the Party do as well to ‘hung for a sheep as for a lamb’, by pushing IHT further and harder. Wealth planners are certainly to be scribbling in their blogs and notebooks on the topic.

The Treasury may get some relief from falling interest rates, but the demands of the public and business for a more favourable tax environment will be difficult to satisfy. Tax increases will inevitably lean on those who do not vote.

Freshen up the squad with a reshuffle?

Unsettlingly, a recent Labour List/Survation poll of Labour members placed the Chancellor top of the list of cabinet members who should be replaced (46% agreeing she should be), with Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall MP narrowly behind. Both have had a bruising first year in office, and, while moving the former is close to unthinkable, ‘Leicester Liz’ is far from secure.

Others in the frame including Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle MP, whose latest comms around the Online Safety Act have raised eyebrows. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson MP has struggled to cut through with a message as compelling as Blair’s mantra ‘education, education, education’.

Conversely, Deputy Leader and Housing and Communities Secretary Angela Rayner MP scores most highly with members who, after all, elected her to be number two to Keir Starmer. There is a strong view that she would be best freed of the responsibility of running a big department (currently the behemoth Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government) so she can go into full attack mode against Reform UK’s ‘gammon army’. The same debate rumbled over the role of Deputy Leader, John Prescott, under Blair. But the combative former merchant seaman kept the big department firmly under his belt.

Meanwhile, class swot and Treasury Chief Secretary Darren Jones MP looks set to continue to rise without trace.

Then there’s the question of what to do with what they used to call the ‘Ministry of Fun’. The Sunday Times’ Tim Shipman reported back in May that the No.10 team wanted to abolish the Department for Culture, Media & Sport – splitting it between business, education and the Treasury.

This would leave Lisa Nandy MP, Culture Secretary, without a job. Chris Bryant MP, a member of her Ministerial team, predictably denied the rumour and said scrapping the department would be “absolute madness”.

But the Department is being described by civil servants as the “Frankenstein’s monster of Whitehall”. Creative industries are pretty united in their opposition to government-backed content scraping by AI bot-crawlers and some other stakeholders (especially the Premier League) may be even more keen to see it go, as the full scale of the football regulator becomes more apparent.

Machinery of government changes rarely capture the public imagination, and tend to create more problems than they solve. Reshuffles are different, however, and more media visibility to publicly relatable and politically incisive figures will help Labour, which is why Angela Rayner should be let loose more often.

To Play the King: a speech to save Labour’s vision

One of the reasons for apparent ‘player fatigue’ in Labour’s squad is that we are beyond a year since the trumpeting of the first legislative programme in July 2024. Some are asking whether it is really the right thing to bump the next King’s Speech to spring 2026? The Observer reports yes, saying that MPs have now been briefed to expect the King’s Speech in May.

This will inevitably delay the introduction of key measures including the Electoral Reform Bill, legislation to regulate AI as well as other Parliamentary moves to address public preoccupations.

The Government’s record on law-making to date has been far from desultory. Out of the 41 bills that featured in last year’s King’s Speech, 30 are either underway or passed completely (judged as good progress compared to other parliamentary sessions). The Government has also passed 10 other pieces of legislation that were not included in the original speech itself. Parliament has been working hard, but there is a real question as to whether the public really engages with law-making when it does not seem to make a difference on the ground in their communities. A new legislative programme would need to include measures which have an immediate and direct effect on people’s lives.