Historians will puzzle over the fall of Keir Starmer, who won a landslide victory in July 2024 only to be pushed out less than two years later, having started no illegal wars, triggered no grave economic crises, and been accused of no scandalous act of corruption. His demise points to an increasingly volatile and impatient electorate.
What did for Starmer?
Starmer's failure was a function of both the man and his times. Critics say he was not a politician, yet he rose to lead a major party and won a 174-seat majority. His success came partly from being in the right place at the right time, but turning Labour into an acceptable receptacle for anti-Tory feeling was a significant achievement after the 2019 drubbing.
However, Starmer lacked several skills of a top-flight politician. His weakness as a communicator was well-documented: he could not make a clear, compelling argument or construct a narrative for his government. Even his resignation speech felt like a recitation rather than an argument.
Lack of a plan and political instinct
Starmer arrived in office without a blueprint or to-do list for departments, wasting valuable time. He also misread the national mood, warning life would get worse instead of fostering optimism. This created a 'feelbad factor' that dampened consumer confidence.
Strategically, he stuck with chief adviser Morgan McSweeney, who focused on wooing Farage-curious 'hero voters' but alienated urban liberals and progressives. A speech warning of Britain becoming an 'island of strangers' drew comparisons to Enoch Powell, and Starmer later walked it back. Multiple U-turns on policies like winter fuel payments and welfare reform eroded his authority.
Delegation and lack of allies
Starmer was unwilling to adjudicate disputes between departments, leading to unmade or reversed decisions. He delegated the appointment of Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador, a move that backfired when Mandelson failed security vetting. He also failed to court individual MPs, leaving him with few supporters when trouble came.
According to one cabinet minister, Starmer suffered the fate of 'the third plumber'—bearing the accumulated rage from austerity, Brexit, and the Truss fiasco. The electorate is impatient, demanding instant results, and social media amplified visceral loathing for him.
Legacy and lessons
In his resignation speech, Starmer highlighted transforming Labour, falling NHS waiting lists, lifting half a million children out of poverty, and workers' and renters' rights. Advocates compare his record to the first two years of the 1945 government. He also boosted Britain's global standing, keeping the UK out of Trump's war with Iran.
Yet, as one ally noted, 'This is not an age of substance, it's an age of sheen—and he was just not very good at that.' The cautionary tale for Andy Burnham or his successor is that the same volatile, impatient country awaits, and few would bet on Starmer being the last victim.
