Labour’s first 100 days: what is their grand plan for government?

Even the focus on whether or not Angela Rayner broke any rules in the sale of her former council house in 2015 has been regarded as another indication that the political spotlight is well and truly turning on to Labour, as if its status as government-in-waiting has been upgraded amid a stubbornly large poll lead and a Tory government unable to go a week without a new internal rift.

Senior figures have been passed work examining why centre-left governments, often taking over from a collapsing populist party on the right, have failed in recent times, in the hope that a first-term Starmer administration could avoid the same fate.

Examples in the US, Australia, Germany, Norway, France and Canada have all been studied to discern the mistakes made by centre-left governments that found themselves trying to draw up a political vision once in power.

Healthy eating – along with the prevention of ill-health – is another easy early hit, while Rayner’s plans to bolster workers’ rights have partly been backed because they do not require huge amounts of new spending.

But others point out that, actually, there is an enormous strategic choice - still live within the party - that will define its opening months and probably those beyond: whether Labour goes for radical moves to bring in funds to rejuvenate the state and increase growth – an option that requires some political pain – or whether it sticks with the strict, self-imposed fiscal rules and hopes that things improve.

Nick Macpherson, the former top Treasury official who was in the post for David Cameron’s transition from opposition to government, said that there is one key question for parties making the switch to power: “Can you multitask?” Whatever the crisis is at any one time, could Starmer deal with it while also staying on track with the big picture reforms?