Starmer has entered the ‘degeneration' phase. His MPs are in despair
It was a very jolly affair, with prosecco on hand as Camilla, Gordon Rayner, our Associate Editor, and I discussed the state of politics and answered questions. The biggest worry in the audience was that Starmer was simply Tony Blair in disguise, and was being 'run' by Labour's most successful Prime Minister in history via his think tank, the Tony Blair Institute.
This was nonsense, I suggested. Blair was far too Right-wing for Starmer.
Chatting afterwards, a number of attendees came up to me to make a point about what being 'Prime Minister of the country' meant to them.
'We have to give him a chance,' one Conservative voter said. 'He won, it's good to end the chaos, and he is the leader now. As long as he is sensible, we will see how it goes.'
This is a very British view of politics and one I wholeheartedly support. The office of Prime Minister is one to be respected, politicians need time to affect change and following the psychodramas of Boris Johnson and the rest a period of calm would be very much welcomed.
I wonder how that Conservative voter is feeling now. After a reasonable opening day speech about governing for everyone, Starmer has induced nausea. Freebie gifts revealed that it was still 'one rule for them'. With no discussion or preparation, the Winter Fuel Allowance was scrapped for all but the lowest paid pensioners. A £22 billion 'black hole' appeared to come as a shock to the Chancellor despite every sensible analyst saying before the election that the public finances were shot. The Budget raised taxes after Labour promises that it would not.
'I need to fix the foundations,' Rachel Reeves told voters as the polls started slipping. Starmer agreed. 'Growth' was everything and 'tough Labour' would not be indulging in any U-turns. Even that gargantuan and ever-increasing benefits bill would be tackled.
Being controversial can have a point in politics – as long as you stick to the course. Starmer has done the opposite, the lead character in a political tragedy about a man who wanted to be king but did not know why. The PM has confused noise from opponents, backbenchers and pressure groups with the very different purpose of running the country.
The result has been strategic chaos – a disaster for anyone residing in Number 10. Where once he was positive about the effects of immigration, now he is talking about 'an island of strangers'. Where the cuts to the Winter Fuel Allowance were an absolute necessity – now they will be at least partially reversed (although when and by how much will be a political running sore for months to come). The two child benefit cap is likely to be lifted. The UK will be in and not in the European Union.
I speak to many senior Labour figures every week. They pinpoint the disastrous local elections as the moment Starmer buckled afresh, casting around in desperation for anything that might shift momentum. A caucus of Red Wall Labour MPs, led by Jo White, demanded changes, particularly to disability benefit cuts. 'We will not budge,' Downing Street insisted, exactly as they had done over the Winter Fuel Allowance. Few believe that position will hold.
Negative briefings are starting to swirl around Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's chief of staff. Enemies point out, and there are many, that the 'hard choices' approach has given way too easily to 'I'll U-turn if you want me to'. Policies that MPs expended a lot of energy defending are now being abandoned, the quickest way to lose faith on the back benches. Nearly 200 Labour councillors lost their jobs in the May elections, a rich seam of angry activists who blame the man at the top.
Starmer and Sweeney go back, to the dark days of the Hartlepool by-election loss in 2021 when Labour was trounced by the Conservatives. Starmer considered quitting and outsourced much of his political thinking to McSweeney, who picked him up and dusted him off. The Corbyn-lite approach that had won the PM the Labour leadership was jettisoned and 'sensible Starmer' took its place, the dry technocrat who would focus on what works.
Labour MPs of the modernising tendency fear Corbyn-lite is creeping back. Adrift in a sea of collapsing personal ratings, Starmer is trying his own form of 'back to basics' – the basics of 'all will have jam' Left wing economics.
'We have no idea who is driving the bus,' said one well placed Labour figure on the chopping and changing at the centre. 'It is not about jam today or jam tomorrow. With no growth there is no jam.'
Reeves is in an increasingly precarious position. She marched into the gunfire with a degree of political bravery, insisting that her decisions had to be taken to re-energise the economy.
My Treasury sources insist there are glimmers of hope that the strategy is working. The first three months of the year saw growth above estimates. Business confidence has started to pick up. In the spending review on June 11, the Chancellor will announce billions of pounds in capital investment in transport hubs, energy, schools, hospitals and research and development. These are the right policies.
The PM is striding in the opposite direction, creating a tension between Number 10 and Number 11 that never augurs well for good government. When Labour published its manifesto in 2024, the only person beyond Starmer himself to appear regularly in the glossy photographs was Reeves. Now it would be Angela Rayner, who is noisily demanding more tax rises.
Like grief, governments travel through five phases. Euphoria, honeymoon, stability, degeneration, failure.
Starmer has managed to leap-frog the first three and has entered 'degeneration' well before the first anniversary of a victory which gave him a 171 seat majority. Even his allies look on baffled, failing to understand that government is difficult, that you cannot gyrate between policy positions and expect appalling poll numbers to improve. Leading requires courage, vision and an ability to communicate. Consistency is the prosaic truth that the Prime Minister has failed to grasp.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Business Insider
17 minutes ago
- Business Insider
8 celebrities who left the US or are considering moving for political reasons
Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi In late November 2024, TheWrap reported that comedian Ellen DeGeneres and her wife, Portia de Rossi, left their Montecito home for the Cotswolds, England. The publication said their move to the countryside was triggered by Trump's election and a source said they're "never coming back." An August 2025 Us cover story notes that DeGeneres told English broadcaster and host Richard Bacon during a July 20 event that she and DeGeneres were in the Cotswolds when the election results came in. "We were like, 'We're staying here. We're not going back,'" DeGeneres told Bacon on their reaction to Trump's victory. According to the Us story, DeGeneres and de Rossi have since moved from the original home they purchased in the Cotswolds and now live in a 10,000-square-foot country home called Hiaven. The pair tend to their chickens, sheep, and horses and walk to the local pub for lunch. Rosie O'Donnell In a video recently posted on TikTok, Rosie O'Donnell confirmed that she moved from the US to Ireland with her youngest daughter, Dakota. The actor relocated on January 15, days before Trump's inauguration. "Although I was never someone who thought I would move to another country, that's what I decided would be the best for myself and my 12-year-old child," O'Donnell said in the video. The talk show host, who has Irish grandparents, said her experience so far has been "pretty wonderful" and she's in the process of getting Irish citizenship. O'Donnell said that she misses her four other kids and her friends, but will remain in Ireland for the time being. "I miss many things about life there at home, and I'm trying to find a home here in this beautiful country," she said. "And when it is safe for all citizens to have equal rights there, in America, that's when we will consider coming back." Sophie Turner UK-born actor Sophie Turner moved to America after marrying singer Joe Jonas. The couple first lived together in Los Angeles and later in Miami with their two daughters Willa and Delphine. Turner and Jonas sold their Miami home in August 2023 and news of their plans to divorce broke weeks later. In an interview with Harper's Bazaar published in October 2024, Turner said that she was homesick while living in the US and struggled with the country's politics. Turner has since moved to West London. "The gun violence, Roe v Wade being overturned... Everything just kind of piled on," Turner said. "After the Uvalde shooting, I knew it was time to get the fuck out of there." Barbra Streisand It was no secret that Barbra Streisand wanted Hillary Clinton to beat Trump in the 2016 election. "He has no facts," Streisand told Australian "60 Minutes" host Michael Usher in a 2016 interview prior to the election. "I don't know, I can't believe it. I'm either coming to your country, if you'll let me in, or Canada." Streisand didn't move out of the US, but she did criticize Trump in her 2018 studio album "Walls." In a 2023 interview with Stephen Colbert, Streisand said that she liked Joe Biden and thought he did a "good job." When asked about the possibility of a second Trump administration, Streisand again said she'd move. "I can't live in this country if he became president," she said, adding that she'd probably move to England. Per an Instagram post shared in early January amid the Los Angeles wildfires, it appears that Streisand still lives in Northern California. Reps for Streisand did not reply to a request for comment. Cher In November 2016, Page Six reported that Cher threatened to move if Trump was elected. "I'm gonna have to leave the planet," she reportedly said at a fundraiser for Clinton. She had a similar stance before Trump officially ran for reelection. "I almost got an ulcer the last time," she told The Guardian in October 2023. "If he gets in, who knows? This time I will leave [the country]." However, as of publication, it doesn't appear that Cher has relocated. Reps for Cher did not reply to a request for comment. Laverne Cox Days after the 2024 presidential election, "Orange Is the New Black" star Laverne Cox appeared on the podcast " Just for Variety" and spoke about the impact the results would have on the transgender community. Cox said that she and some friends were considering moving, but no plans have been solidified yet. "We're doing research on different cities in Europe and in the Caribbean," Cox said. "I don't want to be in too much fear, but I'm scared," the actor added. "As a public figure, with all my privilege, I'm scared, and I'm particularly scared because I'm a public figure. I feel like I could be targeted." Lena Dunham At the 2016 Matrix Awards, "Girls" actor Lena Dunham said that she was serious about moving if Trump won the election. "I know a lot of people have been threatening to do this, but I really will," Dunham said. "I know a lovely place in Vancouver and I can get my work done from there." But after the election results, Dunham changed her mind. "I can survive staying in this country, MY country, to fight and live and use my embarrassment of blessings to do what's right," she wrote in part in a note shared on Instagram. "It's easy to joke about moving to Canada," she added. "It's harder to see, and to love, the people who fill your mailbox with hate. It's harder to see what needs to be done and do it. It's harder to live, fully and painfully aware of the injustice surrounding us, to cherish and fear your country all at once. But I'm willing to try. Will you try with me?" Dunham did eventually leave her home in New York and moved to London. However, in an interview with the New Yorker published in July 2024, the actor said the move was prompted by work opportunities.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Colombians bid farewell to presidential hopeful Uribe after shooting at political rally
APTOPIX Colombia Politics Shooting BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — Colombians on Wednesday bid farewell to senator and presidential hopeful Miguel Uribe Turbay, who died more than two months after being shot during a political rally in the South American country's capital. Family, friends, members of Congress and a delegation of government officials from the United States honored Uribe, whose coffin was draped with Colombia's flag. The 39-year-old died Monday in the hospital where he had been since the June 7 shooting. Thousands of mourners paid their respects Tuesday. 'The bullets that took his life not only broke the hearts of his family, they reopened the fractures of a country that has yet to find peace,' Senate President Lidio García said, referring to Colombia's long history of violence against politicians. Uribe had become one of the strongest critics of Colombia's current government. In October, he joined the list of politicians seeking to replace Gustavo Petro, the first leftist to govern Colombia, in the May 2026 elections. Petro and Vice President Francia Márquez on Wednesday said on social media that they would not attend Uribe's funeral out of respect for his family's wishes. 'We are not going not because we do not want to, we simply respect the family and avoid that the funeral of Senator Miguel Uribe is taken over by supporters of hate,' Petro posted on X. Uribe was shot three times, twice in the head, while giving a campaign speech in a park in a working-class Bogota neighborhood. Authorities have arrested six people, including the teenager they say shot him, but they have not determined who ordered the attack or why. The shooting, caught on multiple videos, alarmed Colombians who have not seen this kind of political violence against presidential candidates since Medellin drug lord Pablo Escobar declared war on the state in the 1990s. Uribe's mother, well-known journalist Diana Turbay, was among the victims in that period. She died during a police rescue after being kidnapped by a group of drug traffickers led by Escobar seeking to block their extradition to the U.S. 'If my mother was willing to give her life for a cause, how could I not do the same in life and in politics?' Uribe, who was 5 when his mother was killed, said in an interview with a Colombian news outlet last year. The senator's family said he would be buried Wednesday at Bogota's Central Cemetery. The cemetery is the oldest in the city and the final resting place of figures such as Liberal leader Luis Carlos Galán, who was shot dead in 1989 while giving a presidential campaign speech in Bogota.


Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Prices Cut In New Offers Before iPhone 17 Release
With just weeks to go before the iPhone 17 series goes on sale (on Sept. 19 — full details here), the iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max are seeing some serious discounts. Although Apple sells the phones at full price only, there are several U.K. retailers who have knocked £100 ($135) off some iPhone 16 Pro and Pro Max models. And it's worth remembering that as soon as the new iPhones are announced, likely on Tuesday, Sept. 9, the current Pro models will be immediately discontinued — unless there's a radical change from previous years' policies. The iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 Plus are likely to remain in the range alongside iPhone 17 and will drop in price, but if you want the Pro model, they will almost certainly be phased out. Here are some of the best bargains currently. Electrical retail giant Currys is selling the iPhone 16 Pro with 128GB storage for £899 ($1,220), which is £100 ($135) down on the regular sticker price. The same £100 off applies to the 256GB model, which is £999 ($1,356) instead of Apple's £1,099 ($1,491) price. Same deal for the 512GB model, £1,199 ($1,627), instead of the £1,299 ($1,762) you'll pay Apple. The iPhone 16 Pro with 1TB costs £1,399 ($1,899), against Apple's usual £1,499 ($2,034) price. Meanwhile, John Lewis has similar prices, that is £899 ($1,220), for the 128GB model, £999 ($1,356) instead of Apple's £1,099 ($1,491) price for the 256GB model, £1,199 ($1,627) for 512GB and £1,399 ($1,899) for the model with 1TB storage on board. If either of these retailers is sold out, there's another retailer that is currently matching all these prices to the penny: Argos. Currys, John Lewis and Argos are uniform on their prices when it comes to the larger-sized iPhone 16 Pro Max. The model with 256GB storage, which is £1,199 ($1,627) at Apple, costs £100 ($135) less, £1,099 ($1,491), at all three retailers. For the 512GB storage, £1,399 ($1,899) at Apple, you'll pay £1,299 ($1,762) at John Lewis, Currys and Argos. For the 1TB storage model, which costs £1,599 ($2,170) at Apple, all three retailers have a £100 ($135) discount, taking the price to £1,499 ($2,034).