logo
Inside Keir Starmer's messy reset

Inside Keir Starmer's messy reset

Photo by Tolga Akmen/EPA/Bloomberg
The Labour Party, Harold Wilson once observed, is 'like a stagecoach. If you rattle along at great speed everybody is too exhilarated or seasick to cause any trouble. But if you stop, everybody gets out and argues about where to go next.'
In some areas, at least, Labour is rattling along. Government officials point to three trade deals in two weeks as evidence of a more 'agile' Britain on the world stage. But Keir Starmer's direction has remained unclear – so everybody is arguing about where to go next.
A 'reset' was what aggrieved MPs demanded after Labour's election humbling: a U-turn on the winter fuel payment cuts, the loosening of Rachel Reeves' fiscal rules and higher taxes on the wealthy. When Starmer responded by vowing to go 'further and faster', some were moved to invoke the popular definition of insanity.
But the Prime Minister is no longer doing the same thing. The means-testing of winter fuel payments was a policy born in the Treasury – one that cabinet ministers such as Ed Miliband and Liz Kendall grasped immediately would prove toxic. Yet it was Starmer rather than Reeves – away at a G7 meeting in Canada – who announced the U-turn. Though No 10 and the Treasury emphasise that the decision was a joint one, here was a moment rich in symbolism. For MPs it was a reminder of Starmer's other job title: First Lord of the Treasury.
The Prime Minister, as Andrew Marr first reported, has also let it be known that abolishing the two-child benefit cap is his 'personal priority'. That stance has prompted reports of tensions between Starmer and his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney who has long been mindful of public support for the policy (and the £2.5bn cost of abolishing it). Sources downplay talk of a rift, noting that the policy is under formal review by the child poverty taskforce (which will report this autumn).
But the impression is again of a Prime Minister asserting his authority. 'I don't know where this 'just fucking do it' energy has come from but I like it,' said one Labour MP, recalling Tony Blair's sudden pledge in 2000 to raise health spending to the European average (which so enraged Gordon Brown). Call it a messy reset.
At times after entering office, Starmer appeared indifferent or outright hostile to Labour MPs' opinions. Seven lost the whip last July after voting for an SNP amendment backing the abolition of the two-child cap. Critics of the winter fuel cuts – an 'almost suicidal' policy, one new MP told me back in August – were greeted with lectures on fiscal responsibility.
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
No 10's imperial phase continued at the start of this year. The foreign aid budget was reduced by 40 per cent to fund higher defence spending (prompting the resignation of Anneliese Dodds, one of Starmer's original allies, as international development minister). The largest welfare cuts since George Osborne occupied the Treasury in 2015 were announced by Reeves. Tory MPs watched with envy at the decisiveness of a government with a majority larger than any since Blair.
But a Downing Street chastened by defeats is now sounding a more emollient tone. 'It's a tough time to be a Labour MP, they're having to decide all the time to take money off somebody and to give it to someone else,' reflects one source.
What has changed? A leadership that defined its priority as winning over the country could not remain obstinate as voters revolted. Nor, as welfare rebels threaten to eradicate the government's 165-seat majority, can it remain dismissive of the party (with concessions to prevent defeat anticipated).
Labour's 'soft left' – the tribe from which Starmer himself originally hailed – is rediscovering its voice (a development some in No 10 welcome). It was Louise Haigh, the former transport secretary, who led public calls for an 'economic reset' after the local elections. Angela Rayner and Gordon Brown have, in different ways, shown what that could look like. On 3 June, Renewal, the social democratic journal now published by Compass (which helped anoint Ed Miliband in 2010), will hold an event to celebrate its relaunch. Its attendees will be much like the typical Labour member: someone who voted for Starmer in 2020 and is increasingly attracted by Rayner.
The Prime Minister, who welcomed conflict with the radical left as a chance to define himself, has baulked at all-out war with the soft left. So another reset is underway. But it remains fraught.
When he announced the winter fuel U-turn, Starmer cited an improving economy (GDP growth was 0.7 per cent in the first quarter, the highest of any G7 country). But even if this trend continues – and economists fear it won't – it will do nothing to help cabinet ministers, such as Rayner, locked in fierce disputes with Reeves over the 11 June Spending Review. 'The envelope has been set,' a Treasury source says, confirming that there will be no leeway (unprotected departments were told to model real-terms cuts of between 5.8 per cent and 11.3 per cent).
Ministers believe that Reeves will once again need to raise taxes and revise her fiscal rules at the Budget this autumn but the word that the Chancellor so loathes – austerity – will be brandished against her in the coming weeks. Over all this looms a familiar question: what defines Starmer? A winter fuel U-turn seemingly driven by polling rather than values has further muddied the waters.
Friends of Starmer reject the charge that he lacks what Tony Blair called an 'irreducible core'. It is, they say, his belief in the dignity of work and the innate worth of every human being (one informed by his parents, and his late brother who had learning difficulties). In opposition he told aides that he wanted to be able to look voters in towns such as Burnley in the eyes in five years' time and tell them that Labour had made 'a genuine difference to your lives'.
But in the heat of government, even allies fear this message has been lost. 'We haven't done enough to articulate what Keir's about,' concedes one senior No 10 source. After Brown U-turned on the abolition of the 10p tax rate – an event Labour MPs have recalled in recent weeks – he spoke of how 'it really hurt that suddenly people felt I wasn't on the side of people on middle and modest incomes – because on the side of hard-working families is the only place I've ever wanted to be. And from now on it's the only place I ever will be.'
By then, the political damage was done but Brown still conveyed genuine remorse. As Starmer seeks to reset his own premiership, can he find the language he needs to do the same?
[See also: Angela Rayner has fired a warning shot at Keir Starmer]
Related

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Chelsea's Conference League prize money shows cost of Villa and Forest failure
Chelsea's Conference League prize money shows cost of Villa and Forest failure

Daily Mirror

time18 minutes ago

  • Daily Mirror

Chelsea's Conference League prize money shows cost of Villa and Forest failure

Chelsea were named Europa Conference League champions this season after dominating the competition, but the prize money they earned exposes the true profitability of the Champions League Chelsea's prize for winning the Europa Conference League has been exposed by the much more lucrative Champions League purse. The revelation rubs salt into the wounds of those who just missed out on qualifying for UEFA's elite club competition this campaign: Aston Villa and Nottingham Forest. The final day of the Premier League season was defined by the battle for Champions League football, with Manchester City, Newcastle, Chelsea, Villa and Forest all in with a shout of nabbing one of three spots up for grabs. Pep Guardiola's side had the simplest job, only realistically needing a draw to stamp their ticket. They did just that after a 2-0 away win against Fulham. ‌ With both the Blues and Nuno Espirito Santo's men facing one another on the final day, the winner would be guaranteed Champions League football. A 50th-minute Levi Colwill tap-in meant that the visitors returned from their trip to the Midlands happy, and finish in fourth thanks to a 1-0 win, starving the home side of an elite European return. ‌ In light of the Villans' 2-0 loss to Manchester United, which came under controversial circumstances after the decision to disallow a Morgan Rogers strike saw a complaint written to the PGMOL, Newcastle took the final place despite losing to Everton. The lucrative prize money associated with playing in the Champions League, which both Forest and Villa narrowly missed out on, has now been highlighted via a statistic involving the Europa Conference League winners and Slovan Bratislava, the team that finished just one place above the bottom of the elite competition's table this time around. Chelsea were rewarded with a reported £18.5million for their European efforts this term. In contrast, the Slovakian champions, despite losing all eight of their Champions League group phase matches, astonishingly earned an almost similar amount. They bagged £15.5m just for qualifying for the competition, and additional sums were earned for finishing in a specific league position, and from broadcast revenue based on a ten-year club coefficient ranking. A total of £18.46m was amassed by the team who finished 35th in the Champions League table, a figure akin to that earned by the winners of the Conference League, reports Birmingham Live. ‌ The Villans and Nuno's Forest, still smarting from their losses, will feel this stark disparity in prize money, although they will be showcasing their skills in both the Europa League and Conference League next season, respectively. Elsewhere, Tottenham – this season's Europa League winners – pocketed £3.6m when they qualified for the competition and earned performance-related amounts and their coefficient share of broadcast revenue on their journey to the final. All told, for winning the tournament, Ange Postecoglou's Spurs raked in roughly £35m, plus an additional £3m for reaching the UEFA Super Cup. This is not even considering the amounts tied to subsequent Champions League qualification. However, this sum is still dwarfed by the earnings of eventual Champions League victors PSG, who pocketed approximately £130m for their success in Munich. Join our new WhatsApp community and receive your daily dose of Mirror Football content. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.

Analysis: Is Reform UK's Nigel Farage a threat to the Union?
Analysis: Is Reform UK's Nigel Farage a threat to the Union?

The Herald Scotland

time25 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Analysis: Is Reform UK's Nigel Farage a threat to the Union?

Just a few months ago the prospect of Mr Farage winning the keys to Number 10 would have seemed unbelievable. Reform has just five MPs but unprecedented gains in local elections in England in May, plus successive polling, has now led to the former Ukip leader becoming the bookmakers' favourite to be Britain's next Prime Minister. READ MORE: Farage 'can't be trusted to oppose SNP' says leading unionist campaign group Analysis: Can Reform UK actually win the Hamilton by-election? Aberdeen councillor Duncan Massey defects to Reform John Swinney news, interviews and updates on the First Minister With the rise of Reform observers are now thinking through the consequences and what will be the impact on the constitutional question. Of course, there are the caveats that this is just one poll and that the next general election isn't scheduled to be held until sometime before August 2029. Political parties' fortunes and misfortunes can radically change in four years. Sir Keir Starmer may be able to move on from some of the controversial decisions such as the cut to winter fuel payments for pensioners which damaged his and his government's popularity in the weeks that followed Labour's election success in July last year. Perhaps Labour may even change leaders and refresh its offering ahead of polling day? Maybe the Tories will recover, though at the moment that is looking very unlikely. But even should none of these changes take place and Reform do storm to victory in 2029, recent history should calm unionist fears that the UK is about to break up. Over the last decade or so similar polling forecasts were made about the rise in support for independence based on various scenarios regarded as fundamentally unpalatable to the values and outlook of Scots. First it was Brexit - leaving the EU would make Scotland independent it was claimed by the SNP. Then it was the Boris Johnson "clown" ; then it was Scotland apparently handling Covid better than the Conservative government, then it was Liz Truss and her dodgy budget and then it was Keir Starmer's and his various "betrayals" of pensioners and the disabled. Yet nine years after the Brexit vote and the turmoil in UK politics which was left in its wake Scotland is still very much part of the Union. So based upon what has happened before I am sceptical whether a Prime Minister Farage would turn Scotland into a nation of Yessers. Besides the 54% support for independence is somewhat off from the level of support First Minister John Swinney suggested would be needed to bring about indyref2. Last month Mr Swinney talked about securing "demonstrable support" for independence and compared it to the 1997 referendum for a Scottish Parliament, which was backed by around 74% of Scots. But it seems that whatever happens at Westminster a certain proportion of Scots may rail about the state of affairs and show their disapproval in opinion polls, before simply getting used to the political landscape there and reluctantly tolerating it. It's a phenomenon which illustrates the limitations of the negative case for independence. So it's probably safe to reassure pro-UK voters that they need not fear that the UK is on course to break up in the next decade, whether Keir Starmer remains in Downing Street after polling day in 2029, gives way to a Labour rival or whether Nigel Farage indeed wins power.

UK must change approach to defence in an insecure world, Starmer warns
UK must change approach to defence in an insecure world, Starmer warns

Rhyl Journal

time29 minutes ago

  • Rhyl Journal

UK must change approach to defence in an insecure world, Starmer warns

But the Prime Minister could not say when his aim of raising defence spending to 3% of the UK's economic output would be realised, amid questions about whether the Treasury had guaranteed to fund it. Britain will build up to 12 new nuclear-powered attack submarines and invest £15 billion in its warhead programme, the Prime Minister is expected to announce on Monday, as the Government unveils its strategic defence review. Significant investment in the UK nuclear warhead programme this Parliament and maintaining the existing stockpile are among the 62 recommendations that the Government is expected to accept in full. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme ahead of the announcement, Sir Keir warned of a 'new era' of instability on defence and security which the review would respond to. He added: 'I think that's a common feeling across Europe and more broadly there is greater instability on defence and security than there has been for many, many years, and greater threats, and that's obviously having a direct impact back into the United Kingdom. Hence the review.' Principles of 'war-fighting readiness' and integrating the UK's forces are at the heart of the review, Sir Keir said. He added: 'We have to recognise the world has changed, and if the world has changed we need to be ready.' Sir Keir also refused to guarantee that defence spending would reach 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2034, saying it was an 'ambition'. The Government has pledged to raise the UK's defence spending to 2.5% of GDP – a measure of the country's economic output – by 2027. But on Sunday, Defence Secretary John Healey sidestepped questions about whether he had any guarantee from the Treasury to provide the funding for the 3% target by the end of the next Parliament, when asked on the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme. Asked about the commitment, Sir Keir told the BBC he was 'not going down that road' of a precise funding commitment until he had a plan behind it. He added: 'We had a commitment for 2.5% by the end of this Parliament. We pulled that right forward to 2027. 'We showed that when we say there's a new era of the defence and security of our country, is our first priority – as it is – that we meant it. We take the same approach to 3%. 'But I'm not going to indulge in the fantasy politics of simply plucking dates from the air until I'm absolutely clear that I can sit here in an interview with you and tell you exactly how that's going to work, because I take the defence and security of our country extremely seriously.' Ministers have been keen to point out that the strategic defence review will support regions across the UK, as 70% of defence jobs are outside of London and the South East. Building the new submarines, which is part of the Aukus partnership with the US and Australia, will support 30,000 highly skilled jobs into the 2030s as well as 30,000 apprenticeships and 14,000 graduate roles across the next 10 years, the Ministry of Defence said. The £15 billion investment into the warhead programme will back the Government's commitments to maintain the continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent, build a new fleet of Dreadnought submarines and deliver all future upgrades. From the late 2030s, the fleet of up to 12 SSN-Aukus conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines will replace seven astute class attack submarines the UK is due to start operating. In response to the strategic defence review, the Government will also commit to: – Getting the armed forces to a stage where it would be ready to fight a war – Boosting weapons and equipment stockpiles and making sure there is capacity to scale up production if needed in a crisis or war – Buying up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons in a move due to support 800 defence jobs – Setting up a new cyber command and investing £1 billion in digital capabilities – More than £1.5 billion of additional funding to repair and renew armed forces housing. The Conservatives and Lib Dems have questioned Labour's commitment to funding the promises it was making. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge suggested his counterpart Mr Healey had been 'hung out to dry by Rachel Reeves' over the 3% target. 'All of Labour's strategic defence review promises will be taken with a pinch of salt unless they can show there will actually be enough money to pay for them,' he added. Lib Dem defence spokesperson Helen Maguire said the 2034 timeline for the commitment 'suggests a worrying lack of urgency from the Government'. She also said: 'Unless Labour commits to holding cross-party talks on how to reach 3% much more rapidly than the mid-2030s, this announcement risks becoming a damp squib.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store