Since Labour took office, the UK press has regularly called for stronger protections

The reasons for doing this are twofold. First and foremost, the influence newspapers carry over our political discourse shapes how protections are framed. It defines whether they are seen as pillars of a modern, fair society, or whether they are portrayed as constraints on individuals, burdens on business and barriers to growth.

Secondly, the press can impact the direction of travel for government. According to Steve Richard, ex Political Editor of the New Statesman, the fear of The Daily Mail’s wrath, or the urgent need to keep The Sun on side has frequently forced politicians in the past to shelve their principles when implementing policy. Riling up the press barons and inviting a deluge of bad PR to a minister’s door can seemingly prove a risk not worth taking.

To explore this question, we’ve analysed the editorials of eight national newspapers, from July 4th to October 4th. The newspapers we analysed are representative of the political leanings of the national press. The four newspapers from the right-leaning press are The Times, The Telegraph, The Mail and The Sun. From the centre ground, The Independent and The Financial Times – and from the progressive side of the press we chose The Guardian and The Mirror.

Read the full report here.

Since Labour took office, the UK press has regularly called for stronger protections

Since July 4th, there have been regular calls for stronger protections and better enforcement. Overall, the number of pro-protections editorials was only 10% lower than the editorials calling for more deregulation. The stories behind this coverage have varied – from calls for better regulation of the gambling industry, to the positive reception within The Guardian and The Mirror of Labour’s ‘New Deal for Workers’ – but a few stories in particular have driven the bulk of the pro-protections coverage.

By far the largest spike in pro-protections coverage came at the beginning of September when the final report on the Grenfell Inquiry was published. Once again the Conservatives found their record in government in the firing line as the dangers of successive deregulatory drives became front page news – and again, the press was united in their condemnation of this.

The sense that a lack of regulation has encouraged profiteering and in some instances has jeopardised public safety has regularly united the press in calling for decisive regulatory intervention. In fact, The Sun newspaper has been responsible for nearly one fifth (19%) of all pro protection editorials. The Times has not been far behind, producing 14% of pro-protections editorials.

 

The mainstream, right-wing press remains very hostile to regulation of the economy

Labour’s ability to grow the economy has become a temperature check for their success in government. Securing the highest sustained growth in the G7 is the first of their five missions, and following years of anaemic growth and soaring public debt, it has become a dominant part of the conversation about how to renew Britain’s fortunes.

Since Labour took office, the mainstream press has been loud and clear about how Labour can achieve this – deregulation. Just under three quarters of all editorials that have supported deregulation have done so on the basis that regulations are unnecessary ‘red tape’ for businesses and that they are barriers to growth.

Labour has faced particular backlash over their pledge to upgrade worker protections which has regularly been criticised for making it “harder [for businesses] to make a profit and help grow the economy.” Alongside this, right-leaning newspapers have regularly questioned whether “onerous regulatory burdens” are deterring investors and have called for further “streamlining of regulation” across the UK to encourage business investment.

Meanwhile, Starmer’s plans to ‘bulldoze through planning laws’ has received a warm reception, with The Times calling it a ‘Home Run’ and The Sun welcoming the reform of a system which has been a ‘brake on growth’. Labour has made planning reform a central plank of their offer to ‘get Britain building’, and this muscular deregulatory language has landed well with the mainstream press.

A cakeist press?

The demands from the right-wing, mainstream press for the deregulation of the economy are clearly having an impact. Earlier this week at Labour’s International Investment Summit, Keir Starmer worked hard to woo foreign capital with promises to ‘slash red tape’ and ‘rip out bureaucracy’. There were even jokes on stage from ex-Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, of the need for an ‘anti-regulation minister’.

Starmer’s strategy mimics the way in which the press approaches the issue of regulation. One week editors will lament the lack of protections which allows big tech giants to profit by  promoting dangerous far-right social media accounts, and the next week they will happily applaud the thought of Keir Starmer relaxing regulations for big tech firms. In the mind of the mainstream press, the debate around growth seems entirely divorced from the debate around protections.

For the Protections Movement this means two things. Firstly, the Government’s narrative on regulators standing in the way of growth sets a clear direction of travel – one in which social and environmental protections are likely to be framed as secondary concerns behind their imperative to drive investment and growth. Reframing economic development as more than a shallow discussion about growth will therefore be a major priority over the course of the coming Parliament.

And secondly, within this context we need to make an explicit case that protections do not stand in opposition to Labour’s economic strategy. Whether it’s productivity gains leveraged through stronger worker protections or money saved ensuring sewage companies invest in infrastructure, regulations must be framed as investments, not costs.

Communicating this clearly is the strongest insurance the Protections Movement has against the siren song of deregulation. As Starmer’s team searches for solutions to Britain’s problems, we need to ensure they are not seduced by the language of ‘quick fixes’ and deregulation – and that instead they offer a proper vision for Britain where strong social and environmental protections are prioritised alongside economic growth.