Labour's Ed Miliband faces an unloved coalition, led by two men, one of whom, David Cameron, struggles to command his party, while judgment on the other, Nick Clegg, has long since been made by a majority of the British public.
Yet the leader of the Labour Party struggles to appear in the public’s mind as one with the gravitas necessary who could one day occupy 10 Downing Street.
Labour’s opinion poll lead, measuring between 6 and 10 percentage points, appears substantial but is judged “soft” at this stage in the electoral cycle, given the Conservatives/Liberal Democrats coalition’s woes.
Criticism that a leader does not look like a leader can be made of many, if not most during famine years on the opposition benches, but Miliband’s problems are acute.
On occasion he has managed to articulate the public’s mood – on the sins of the press or the discontent with the workings of capitalism – before falling back, once again, in estimations.
Last week Labour tried to deal with its Achilles’ heel: the belief most voters have that it was to blame for more of the economic crisis that has affected the UK since 2007 than it has accepted.
'Benefits party'
Shadow chancellor Ed Balls came out first, copying his mentor Gordon Brown's decision in the 1990s to commit to following Conservative-made spending plans in the first year of power. Then Miliband emerged to tackle Labour's other sore: the belief, driven home by Cameron at every turn, that Labour has become "the benefits party", not the party of labour.
Since then, Labour MPs have congratulated themselves that the week went rather well, even if some of the content is fluff: more capital spending, for instance – this from a party that slashed it in the future spending programme it left on incoming ministers’ desks three years ago.
However, they reversed past opposition to ending winter fuel payments, while admitting that they would not overturn the coalition’s decision to cut child benefits for better-off parents.
This issue is central – even if many of the people receiving them are not natural Labour voters – since universality lies at the heart of the welfare state built by Labour in the years after the second World War.
Curbing it, even at the edges, would threaten the implicit understanding between the different classes: if the middle classes are getting less, why should they accept what goes to the poor?
By declaring that the welfare Bill would be capped, Miliband has managed to turn Labour’s narrative on benefits a little, but the promise is riddled with loopholes. Even his own do not believe it would amount to much.
Equally, he had railed against the child benefit changes but will now not end them – a point over which David Cameron took exquisite pleasure during last week’s prime minister’s questions.
The welfare proposals have come from an intellectual debate of some quality around Miliband for the last two years, even if it has been one that has worried more traditional backbenchers.
Months of work went into ensuring party unity was maintained – a totem, in public at least, for Labour since the battles of the 1980s and 1990s. The language was “road-tested” on MPs and changed where necessary.
Tough decisions
For Miliband's supporters, last week showed he can take the tough decisions in tough times, but if the language of politics changes then so too does the argument.
Miliband and Balls spent nearly three years saying the coalition’s spending plans were wrong, but now they say they will keep them, temporarily at least. The danger now is of the accusation of flip-flop. For much of Labour, Cameron changed the welfare debate by demonising the poor at every turn, though they fail to understand that a percentage of the public came to their conclusions by themselves, with little nudging.
Younger voters, according to detailed and long-running research by British Social Attitudes, believe less in the welfare state and are less interested in intergenerational unity – largely because many believe they are getting an unequal share of the pot. If the opinion polls are right, and if the election happened tomorrow, Miliband would be prime minister of a single-party government with a majority of nearly 100 seats.
Last week’s speeches began the journey to 2015. But even three years on, Labour does not accept that its spending habits – which left the UK in deficit in good times before the crisis hit – were a mistake.
The fact that the public and the Conservatives were happy with that spending – and, indeed, demanded more – matters naught. The political caravan has moved on, and Labour must find a way to get to its head.