Skip to content

For Labour to Win, My Dad Needs to Like Ed Miliband

Labour’s path to victory depends on persuading voters like my dad that it won’t make life harder, but right now, he thinks Ed Miliband’s energy policies and Rachel Reeves’ tax hikes are doing exactly that.

If Labour wants to win the next general election, my dad needs to believe that Ed Miliband isn’t about to make life harder. Right now, that’s not looking good. He thinks Rachel Reeves has put a tax on jobs, that Miliband has made energy more expensive, and that net zero is an expensive fantasy while China, India, and Russia carry on polluting. His frustration is exactly why Reform is growing. It’s not that he’s a Farage fan; he just thinks Labour doesn’t understand what people like him actually worry about.

The problem isn’t the VAT rise, it’s the new employers’ National Insurance hike. Raising it to 15% on salaries above £5,000 isn’t some abstract fiscal policy. It’s a direct cost on hiring, a tax on employment. My dad sees it as Labour punishing people who run businesses, people who create jobs, people who, in his mind, make the economy function. And crucially, he sees Reform hammering home the argument Labour refuses to engage with: that making it more expensive to employ people means fewer jobs, worse pay, and a struggling economy. Labour might argue that the revenue will help fund public services, but my dad, and thousands like him, see it as just another way the state takes and takes while offering little in return.

Then there’s Miliband. My dad’s problem with Labour’s energy policy isn’t that it’s green, It’s that it’s expensive. He’s watching his bills go up while Labour promises wind farms and publicly owned renewables, and he doesn’t see how any of that helps now. He looks at Britain shutting down oil fields while importing energy from abroad and thinks: why not just use what we have? The moral argument about net zero won’t work here. The economic argument might, if Labour actually makes it.

That means framing green energy as a matter of British independence, not British guilt. If Labour pitches Great British Energy as a way to stop depending on volatile global energy markets, lower bills, and guarantee national security, people like my dad might listen. But if the argument remains “this is the right thing to do,” Reform will keep winning votes by saying, “and you’re paying for it.”

Right now, Labour is too focused on why their policies are right, while Reform is winning over people like my dad by explaining why their lives feel worse. The difference is crucial. If Labour can’t show that its tax plans will actually support business, that green energy means lower bills soon, and that the economy won’t grind to a halt under its governance, then people like my dad will look elsewhere. And in this next election, “elsewhere” doesn’t mean the Tories, it means Reform.


Artificial Intelligence (9) Book Review (78) Books (82) Britain (35) Capitalism (9) Conservative Government (35) Creeping Fascism (12) diary (11) Donald J Trump (45) Elon Musk (9) Europe (11) Film (11) France (14) History (9) Imperialism (16) Iran (10) Israel (14) Keir Starmer (10) Labour Government (25) Labour Party (9) Marxist Theory (10) Migrants (13) Nigel Farage (13) Palestine (9) Protest (14) Reform UK (21) Russia (12) Television (9) Ukraine (9) United States of America (85) War (19) Work (9) Working Class (9)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Share the Post:

Latest Posts

A vintage revolver mounted on a plain beige wooden wall, evoking the concept of Chekhov’s gun. The weapon is displayed in profile with a dark blued metal frame and a worn wooden grip, lit softly to highlight its aged, utilitarian design.
Alexander Dugin

The Gospel of World War Three: Alexander Dugin and the Death Cult of Civilisation

Alexander Dugin’s latest polemic is not political analysis but fascist sermon—an apocalyptic blueprint in which nuclear war is both inevitable and desirable. Cloaked in the language of sovereignty and tradition, it is a call to arms for a new ideology of holy Russian power. What begins with Fordow ends with the end of humanity. And for that reason alone, it demands scrutiny—not celebration. You listening, tech bros?

Read More »
A square-cropped image featuring the bold black text "THE SAMSON OPTION" in all capital letters on a cream background. The second "O" in "OPTION" is stylised with the upper half containing the Israeli flag and the lower half the American flag, symbolising the book’s geopolitical focus
Iran

The Bomb in the Basement, the Bomb in the Mountains: Israel, Iran, and the Nuclear Hypocrisy of the West

The next state to cross the nuclear threshold won’t be doing anything new. It’ll be following the path Israel already took—building the bomb in secret, shielded by silence and strategic utility. The real precedent was set decades ago in the Negev. That’s the hypocrisy at the heart of the so-called international order: one bomb is a threat to civilisation, the other a pillar of it. This isn’t about non-proliferation. It’s about who gets to own the apocalypse.

Read More »
A stylised, screen-printed poster shows the Spanish PM in a suit walking past large NATO emblems on bold, flat panels. The image is rendered in a 1968 protest aesthetic with a grainy texture and a limited palette of red, navy blue, and beige. The composition evokes vintage political posters, with stark contrast and minimal detail emphasising the symbolism of militarism and conformity.
Donald J Trump

Only Spain Has Got It Right

At The Hague summit, NATO committed to spending 5% of GDP on defence and security by 2035—a figure with no strategic rationale and every sign of submission to Donald Trump. Only Spain said no. Pedro Sánchez broke ranks, arguing that gutting public services to fund rearmament was neither economically justifiable nor politically defensible. In doing so, he exposed what the rest of Europe won’t admit: this isn’t about defence. It’s about deference. And someone had to refuse.

Read More »