A Year In: Labour's Communications Challenge and How Business Can Respond
Last week, the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) hosted a timely breakfast event exploring how the government's relationship with business has evolved under Labour and titled ‘Red Tape or Red Carpet? How Has the Government’s Relationship with Business Changed Under Labour?’, the session brought together industry colleagues to discuss whether the new administration was paving a clear path for economic growth or creating new bureaucratic entanglements.
Chaired by Farzana Baduel, CEO of Curzon PR and President-Elect of the CIPR, the panel provided invaluable insight. Guests included John Lehal, former Chief Operating Officer of the Labour Party; Alice Grimes, Head of Public Affairs at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI); and Grace Wyld, Head of Policy and Research at the Future Governance Forum. The timing of the event was significant, marking just over one year since Labour's historic landslide victory in July 2024.
The central tension of the discussion was clear: while the government has made progress in its first year, ministers are becoming frustrated that their message isn't "on the front foot" or being widely recognised. Despite a large number of press officers within the government machine, the administration's story of change and growth is not cutting through.
From Opposition Agility to Government Machinery
The panel offered a striking contrast between Labour in opposition and Labour in power. Pre-election, the party operated with a startup-like agility, with the lines of communication being ‘really tight.’ They were proactive in developing policy and engaging directly with businesses and stakeholders, building a reputation as a credible ‘government-in-waiting.’ Ministers and advisers were accessible, responsive, and nimble.
However, the reality of governing has introduced a new dynamic. The civil service, with its ingrained processes and risk-averse culture, has slowed the pace of change. As was noted, "civil servants make recommendations to you, often looking at things through a lens of kind of worst-case scenario." This caution, while understandable, has constrained the government's agility. What was once a swift, direct operation has now become part of a complex, structured system.
For business leaders who had grown accustomed to Labour's responsiveness before the election, this shift has led to slower turnarounds, uncertainty, and mixed signals. It's not a matter of bad will, but the inevitable friction of a new government learning to operate within a vast and cautious bureaucratic machine after 14 years out of power.
A Cultural Challenge: The Civil Service and Risk
The conversation delved into the cultural challenge at the heart of this issue. When asked what the Civil Service must do to better understand business and become more delivery-focused, the consensus was that while it is filled with talent and commitment, its culture is not structured for innovation. Siloed departments, cautious officials, and a lack of business fluency at senior levels create an environment where a ‘mission-driven’ government struggles to flourish. Change is happening, but this is not being seen, and it is not relating back to delivery, which is what counts.
The panel argued that to achieve its ‘missions,’ the government needs new capabilities within the Whitehall machine. It requires civil servants who can think cross-departmentally, communicate a clear narrative, manage complex relationships, and have the humility to admit what they don't know. As one panellist put it: "It requires a different kind of capability within Whitehall, and the humility to say we don’t have all the answers." Another added: "If missions are to be achieved, they will be achieved by society and the civil service working in collaboration across sectors."
This is not a one-way street; for mission-driven government to succeed, business must also engage with clarity and practical, aligned proposals. Importantly, though, a new agile culture is needed within the civil service.
In my eight years of working as a specialist withinthe UK Government, I’ve had the pleasure of working with some exceptional civil servants, who focus on delivery, some of whom have grown frustrated by the siloed focus on tactical delivery rather than strategic nation-building. And yes, I’ve seen that decision first-hand.
Delivery, Delivery, Delivery - The Problem of Communications and Strategic Leadership
Keir Starmer’s first address outside Number 10 set a clear tone: trust would be rebuilt through "actions, not words." This theme of delivery over messaging has shaped the administration and led the public to focus on delivery before the necessary changes to the machinery of government were made.
Yet the cultural focus on messaging and perception persists. This raises a critical question: how can a government dedicated to delivery transform itself when its core communications approach remains tethered to a traditional media mindset and a culture of risk aversion?
The government’s view of communications appears to be outdated, failing to recognise how dramatically the media landscape has changed. Public opinion is no longer solely shaped by front-page headlines; it is forged in private groups, on social media, and through online communities. While legacy media titles still hold influence, their reach is diminishing.
This is where the appointment of David Dinsmore, a former newspaper editor, to head the Government Communication Service becomes a strategic point of contention. It is not a personal criticism, but a question of strategy. Is a leader with a background rooted in traditional press best equipped to navigate a complex, multi-channel environment where influence is built through listening, storytelling, and nuanced engagement? The government needs a strategic leader who understands this shift and can educate those at the top, from political appointees to senior civil servants, that press relations alone will not get the message out.
Equally, the recent move by Number 10 to restrict civil servants from speaking publicly further highlights this strategic disconnect. As the Institute for Government rightly points out, this is not message discipline; it is "message dysfunction." Such a policy is counterproductive, leaving ministers to answer every technical and operational question and undermining their ability to focus on vision and leadership.
A smarter strategy would separate the political from the practical: ministers articulate the mission, while civil servants explain the details of delivery. Empowering officials to speak builds public trust and helps external partners plan and align. This centralisation of control reveals a deep discomfort with openness, when what is needed is transparency and a recognition of how influence is built in today's environment.
Control of the message is critical and important, but control is needed more during a crisis and not when you are trying to build awareness and your reputation. As the saying goes in corporate communications, you need to get your staff to sell your message and your influencers to amplify it. If they don’t or you restructure them, then the job is harder.
The Return of Strategic Departments
Despite these challenges, there are signs of progress. The government’s ‘growth’ mission is slowly beginning to change thinking at the centre, encouraging a more strategic approach from businesses and their communications operations. While engagement is primarily with large enterprises, the voices of small and medium-sized businesses, the majority of the UK economy, are being heard through trade bodies and associations.
Another key shift is the presence of trade unions in business forums and industrial strategy meetings. This reflects Labour’s roots but also signals a broader move towards tripartite policymaking involving government, business, and labour. While this may have caught some companies off guard, it’s not inherently negative. Done well, it leads to more stable, inclusive, and legitimate policymaking.
Recommendations for Engaging with Government
Drawing from the panel’s insights and the broader political landscape, here are key recommendations for businesses, investors, and trade associations looking to engage effectively with this government:
Speak in Coalitions: Ministers are time-poor. Don’t go it alone. Use your trade body or form strategic alliances to amplify your message and demonstrate consensus. The government wants solutions, not just more stakeholder management.
Frame Everything in Public Benefit Terms: Your pitch must align with national missions: better jobs, higher wages, climate transition, or skills. Show what your proposal means for the UK public, not just your firm's bottom line.
Support the Civil Service Modernisation Agenda: Offer to help. Provide secondments. Co-develop policy pilots. Encourage regulators to co-design solutions. Civil servants need external insight, not pressure.
Be Solution-Led, Not Lobbyist-Led: Make your proposals specific and practical. Show the trade-offs and provide clear options. Ministers and advisers will not prioritise vague asks or general introductions.
Engage Beyond Your Sector: Missions are cross-cutting. Connect your business to wider missions like net-zero, skills, or public health. This shows you are a partner in national renewal, not just a sectional interest.
Invest in Local Delivery Partnerships: If you want to build credibility, show up in the regions. Industrial strategies are being shaped at the local level. Join those conversations and demonstrate your commitment on the ground.
This is the Moment to Deliver
The panel ended with cautious optimism. Labour has cleared the first hurdle: building credibility and articulating a mission. The real test now is delivery, and getting that message out. This will be the immense challenge facing David Dinsmore and the political leadership at the heart of government.
At a time when the Government Communication Service has gone through a period of shock, it needs modernisation and the ability to be agile. There is also a need among leadership that civil servants, from fast-stream to SCS3s, understand that their reputation and perception matter in how policies they create for the ruling party are perceived. If your stakeholders don’t buy into your policies, and there has been no strategic and collaborative working in the creation of policy, tactical communications activities will fail to secure buy-in.
Now is the time to engage with and educate those at the top, making it clear that the press alone will not convey the message effectively.
Changing that perception while simultaneously pushing out a core message of change and growth will be exceptionally difficult. It requires strategic communications not just within the GCS, but across the entire civil service, empowering officials to be the credible voice of the government's work.
This government wants growth and delivery. But it needs your expertise, your partnerships, and your ideas to make it happen.
The moment for talk is over; the moment for delivery is now.
