In a parallel universe, and perhaps a happier one for him, Sir Keir Starmer would have ended up as attorney general in some sort of Labour government, led by someone other than him. He confessed as much to his sympathetic biographer, Tom Baldwin, some time ago. More recently, this accidental prime minister has been unburdening himself in a series of interviews to mark his first, rather difficult year in office.
“In office”, that is, rather than “in power”, as the old saying goes, because his authority has been draining away at an alarming rate lately. It seems to be getting him down.
The leadership was a job Sir Keir may not have wanted that much, but it was almost thrust into his safe hands after the debacle of the 2019 general election, and he did his duty. Picking up the pieces after Jeremy Corbyn stepped down, the most famous son of a toolmaker in the country was soon rolling up his sleeves – a favourite expression – and rebuilding his party in his image.
He took on the role because there was no one else in the party capable enough, and willing to take it on. He thought, as did virtually everyone, that it would take two terms to unwind Boris Johnson’s thumping majority. As it turned out, Mr Johnson and his colleagues, most notably Dominic Cummings and Liz Truss, plus Brexit, helped make sure that the task of returning Labour to government could be undertaken rather more quickly.
Sir Keir and his advisers did well to campaign in such a way as to secure a landslide Commons majority – but at 34 per cent of the vote, their mandate was less solid than it looked, and Sir Keir’s personal ratings never approached the stellar figures achieved by, say, Tony Blair, or indeed Mr Johnson.
Now, those ratings are heading towards nadirs suffered by prime ministers much further into their tenure. The general sense of malaise seems to have entered the prime minister’s soul, confessing to any passing journalist his regrets, mistakes and failures, including, most unfortunately, not realising what an impact his “island of strangers" speech would make.
The latest U-turn, on reforms to social security, must surely eat further into his self-confidence. It is not so much the details of the changes – they are mostly sensible – but the way they have been wrung out of the government that has done the damage.
Despite early warnings, Sir Keir seems to have failed to engage with the whips and his own ministers until it was too late to prevent an open mutiny of such strength that any premier would have had to back down. As a result, Sir Keir looks like he is following his backbenchers rather than leading them – weak.
This is bad enough, but the measures in the revised welfare reforms aren’t all that popular with the general public. At least when the prime minister climbed down on the pensioners’ winter fuel payment and the grooming gangs inquiry, eventually, he was on the right side of public opinion.
He may not get much credit, but at least he tried to rescue some goodwill; the U-turn on welfare doesn’t even have that meagre consolation. In fact, it might have been better to pause and work for a more comprehensive resolution that protected the fiscal position and the welfare of vulnerable people.
As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson Steve Darling reminded more experienced colleagues in the chamber, rushed legislation has often proved bad legislation. After all, there is no logic in someone with exactly the same mobility challenges as an existing claimant receiving less financial assistance. This messy compromise is an unfortunate way to mark the Labour government’s first year of “change” – changing their minds three times in as many weeks.
Still, hope springs eternal in the Labour Party, as it generally must. Sir Keir’s battalion of sorrows has arrived remarkably quickly, but they are not so different from the “mid-term blues” that have awaited almost every government since the Second World War.
The prime minister can be proud of his record on foreign affairs – three substantial trade deals, including the Brexit reset, plus an inexplicably warm relationship with Donald Trump. Proof, at last, that opposites attract.
The prime minister has also ended long-running disputes relating to the Chagos Islands and Gibraltar – and, albeit far too little and too late, has at least now declared that the conduct of Israel’s war in Gaza is unacceptable. The UK should be boosting spending on defence, and trying to sustain Nato and the defence of Ukraine. The prime minister has done all of that, too.
Domestically, things have not proceeded so smoothly – and that has hammered his authority, as rounds of elections and the resurrection of Nigel Farage show. Only if the public perceives tangible changes in the quality of public services will they be prepared to back Labour for a second term of office.
The same goes for the economy more broadly, and on control of migration. The government still has time on its side here, if it is not complacent. It needs a “narrative” – but also improvements people can see and sense. Thanks to his restless health secretary, Wes Streeting, the NHS is being reformed and restored, and waiting times are coming down.
There is clearly much more to do, but previous prime ministers have been through worse, and some even went on to win, against all odds. One year in, it is far too soon to write off Sir Keir, unless he himself decides to do so.
If AI kills off entry-level jobs, can the City survive?
Starmer’s welfare U-turn means he is now following his party, not leading it
This is the last chance for Labour and the Tories to stay relevant
This 10-year plan may be the last chance to save the NHS
The prime minister’s welfare U-turn is welcome – but not the end of the matter
Delaying welfare reform is better than bad welfare reform, prime minister
