logo
Who is in charge? The prime minister's authority is in question again

Who is in charge? The prime minister's authority is in question again

BBC News19-07-2025
Who is in charge? You might think the answer should be obvious."This government should be walking on water, there should be nothing it can't do," a Whitehall insider suggests, given the rows and rows and rows - and yes, rows - of Labour MPs who line up behind the prime minister every Wednesday.But, by booting out a small band of backbenchers this week, Sir Keir Starmer's put the question of his authority back on the table.Answering the question of who is in charge isn't so simple after all.This government has a "backbench they - and we - are surprised to discover they can't control," says one senior official.The financial markets are breathing down its neck, with the country's debts sky high, and for good measure, what a No 10 source describes as a "deep current of instability" around the world.Sir Keir's next one-to-one meeting with President Donald Trump is a case in point – who knows what he will or won't say alongside the prime minister on Scottish soil next week?No-one in government can be sure how that is going to shake down, although I was very definitively told we will not be seeing Sir Keir swinging a club with his transatlantic pal.It is, of course, impossible for any administration to be the master of all it surveys. But convincingly displaying authority, inhabiting its power, is a different task.And neither all of Sir Keir's MPs, nor all of the people inside the government are sure it's being met.
Backbench bust-ups
Let's start with the prime minister kicking out four MPs this week after they had objected to various Labour plans and proposals.But if Sir Keir really felt in control of his party, why did he need to bother about a group of MPs that wouldn't even fill a family saloon? And why did he do it, just days before accepting some of the logic of one of those he kicked out, Chris Hinchcliff, over tweaks to proposed planning laws?Bemused? You wouldn't be the only one.Sir Keir's allies say he always believed there would have to be repercussions for MPs who plot against the government repeatedly, in part because others are asked to defend decisions that might be unpopular or difficult.So after the welfare fiasco, the whips were asked to make a list of those who had been actively trying to organise resistance to government plans, rather than just expressing objections.After gathering evidence about MPs' behaviour, those four were then shown the door, at least for now, to exert discipline over the backbenches.A senior government figure said: "You can have as big a majority as you want, but if you have no discipline whatsoever it can get chaotic. You can't get chaotic at a time when the country desperately needs its government to get on with things."It was a separate decision to suspend Diane Abbott - again, a choice made by Labour HQ who felt it had no choice but to act, interpreting her comments as repeating a claim that Jewish people don't experience racism in the same way as black people.So, "behave - or else", is the message to the rest of the backbenches, just when they are about to leave Westminster.But have the moves this week made a difference? One senior MP said: "A lot of people keep wondering, 'Is Keir beholden to his back benches?' I don't think people are like, 'Oh we're going to rebel if we're unhappy all the time'. But there has to be more respect for MPs who are actually out talking to their constituents."Another senior Labour figure told me, "No 10 was completely spooked by what happened over welfare – I don't think backbenchers are running it, but they do have a taste for power."
Are ministers the masters?
Who then, is really in charge, I ask a member of the government. They laugh, and say, "I don't have an answer".The same question posed to another Whitehall figure: "There is no way of knowing," they respond, suggesting sometimes government, even 12 months in, feels chaotic, with contradictory instructions to officials being given, even on the same day.It's no secret, and it's not surprising, that working out how to run a country when you haven't done it before is hard.There are plenty of ministers and staffers who will of course say loyally that No 10 is now firmly in control after understandable teething troubles, who are also somewhat fed up with the noises off.As one government source reckons, "a bit of loyalty wouldn't go amiss". Another insider believes Whitehall is working much better than before. "In the first six months they were disappointed in us, and we were disappointed with them".The Spending Review process occupied huge amounts of time and effort across government. Now that is over, it's not just the government's purse strings that have been set, but the political priorities alongside. In theory, as that source suggests, "they are now starting to get on with the doing".
But that optimism is not springing from every source.One experienced senior official told me: "A government is in charge if it has a plan, but if it doesn't, it cedes that. They still don't really have a governing plan, so it feels like the PM is in charge, but it is hard for his writ to be made to work."In other words, it's clearer now, particularly after the big review of spending, what the government wants to do, but not how they plan to do it.Another senior figure said: "They're busy and exhausted going to meetings with each other, and producing documents that no-one ever reads, and conversations that don't lead to anything and telling each other how difficult it is – they don't inhabit their power."And there's obvious frustration among the government's own members too, one warning of a passive attitude among some colleagues, who could get to the next election and think only, "Well, I enjoyed driving around in my ministerial car and having my red box". There is a feeling, like, "Oh, we are here just to manage, not to lead and drive, and that's not good enough".Not surprisingly, one cabinet minister defended the operation, "It's only been a year, people focus on the problems, if you look at it in the round we have been very, very effective," they told me.
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
Governments are, of course, never short on helpful advice. As well as No 10's own learning on the job, and plans to improve its operations, like a review of communications across government that is under way, there will be other more formal suggestions in the coming months.Later in the summer a set of proposals will be published by a think-tank with close links to No 10 and Labour, the Future Governance Forum, that's chaired by the former senior civil servant, Helen MacNamara.The review will recommend a new government department, called "Downing Street", to give this and future prime ministers a more powerful centre of government so that No 10 can make decisions more quickly, and execute its plans more effectively.Government insiders may not have appetite for any big bang changes, although they have pledged themselves on many occasions to "rewire" the government.The respected Institute for Government already warned this week that big changes were needed if "ministers were serious" about their promise to rewire the state, concluding in its own research that Sir Keir's notion of "mission driven government" looks "shaky", and that government departments had reverted to old habits.Moving desks and chairs around Whitehall, whether creating new departments or axing the old, wouldn't exactly make the pulse of the public quicken, but perhaps it ought to be on the agenda for a government that has struggled sometimes to exert its will.
The mighty markets
If ministers' grip isn't as tight as it might be, and backbenchers aren't calling the shots, there is no doubt there's another huge controlling factor.A senior Labour source tells me, "People like to boil this down to palace politics," the jockeying for power between politicians, or the competing beliefs inside the party.Surely not, Westminster enjoying a soap opera about the battle for the party's soul?But instead they argue, "The markets are fundamentally a really major part of it – the government isn't making challenging decisions because it enjoys annoying people, or making life hard".It's true the fights inside and outside the government are so often driven by cash sloshing around or falling down the back of the sofa.Spoiler, overall spending is enormous but Rachel Reeves keeps a very tight grip on her wallet.By instinct, Labour politicians normally want public spending to be generous.Since returning to power they have hiked taxes in order to increase the amount of money going into the NHS particularly a lot.But the country's debts are historically massive, and keeping up with the interest payments alone costs more than a hundred billion every year, around double what the UK spends on defence.
The government needs the financial markets to have faith in the UK so that businesses see the UK as a good place to spend cash, but crucially so they don't increase the costs of borrowing even more."The market is the biggest influence on them," a senior Labour figure tells me. "It is uncomfortable for a Labour government, but none of them want to end up in the Truss situation," where the City freaked out after promises of huge tax cuts without a plan to pay for them, borrowing costs went through the roof, and she had to say goodbye to her job in less than two months.At the top of the Labour Party it's common to find frustration that the rank and file don't all appreciate what they see as the cold facts.A senior government source summed up: "The markets are more in charge the more we borrow, so people who want more parliamentary sovereignty shouldn't be advocating for things that require more borrowing – markets aren't in charge, but people who lend you money expect it to be paid back."No government, at any time, has been able to do exactly what it pleases.For as long as governments borrow, the entities that lend to them will retain influence.But having to be careful with cash to keep the markets on side is an acute pressure for Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves.
As one senior official says "it is the binding constraint".And unless and until the economy improves convincingly, or indeed the chancellor or the prime minister have a personality transplant, the markets will exert a mighty force over what they do.With the markets, ministers and MPs, all jostling, who then really is in charge?A senior government figure has the ultimate answer – "the voters of course".It was the public's response to the winter fuel allowance decision that led No 10 in the end to drop it.And when opposition parties zone in on public attitudes to some issues they can in turn force ministers to act.The public's current interest in Reform UK occupies and terrifies Labour as well as the Conservatives.Opposition politicians might not have the power to make decisions, but the issues they campaign on along with their fellow travellers and supporters can shape what happens at the top.As this political season draws to a close, Nigel Farage will join us live in the studio tomorrow.But in the end, of course, it is always you that has the say, you who can determine whether Labour prospers, whether in a few years time you give them another chance.But to persuade you of that, the government will want to look more convincingly in control than in its first twelve months.
BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Poll of the day: Should England's Euro 2025 win be marked with a bank holiday?
Poll of the day: Should England's Euro 2025 win be marked with a bank holiday?

The Independent

time14 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Poll of the day: Should England's Euro 2025 win be marked with a bank holiday?

The Lionesses' dramatic penalty shootout victory over Spain in the Euro 2025 final has sparked nationwide celebrations – and renewed calls for a bank holiday to celebrate the historic win. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer made a surprise appearance at the stadium in Basel alongside his wife Victoria, describing the Lionesses as 'history makers' after watching them defend their European title. Their victory has been hailed not just as a footballing triumph but also as a cultural milestone in the ongoing fight for equality and recognition in sport. Sir Keir previously backed calls for a 'proper day of celebration' when England reached the Euro 2022 final, saying the team's success should be honoured with a nationwide event to promote women's and girls' participation in football. Now, many are asking whether this latest win should spark the same conversation. The FA confirmed there will be an open-top bus parade along the Mall before the ceremony at the Queen Victoria Memorial. However, an official bank holiday has not been announced. So – should the Lionesses' Euro 2025 win be marked with a bank holiday, or are there better ways to honour their legacy? Vote in our poll and tell us what you think in the comments below.

Sunday's News in Pictures: Donald Trump announces US-EU trade deal at Turnberry after day of golf
Sunday's News in Pictures: Donald Trump announces US-EU trade deal at Turnberry after day of golf

Scotsman

time15 minutes ago

  • Scotsman

Sunday's News in Pictures: Donald Trump announces US-EU trade deal at Turnberry after day of golf

It was a busy day at Turnberry in South Ayrshire yesterday, with US President Donald Trump enjoying a day of golf before announcing a trade deal with the EU. Ahead of sitting down for a discussion with European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, Mr Trump played a few rounds of golf with his family, where he was seen blowing kisses to supporters. It was later that day that he spoke with Ms von der Leyen to announce a trade deal between the EU and the US. Today, Mr Trump is set to meet one-on-one with UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer at Turnberry, before they are expected to travel to a private engagement at Trump International in Menie. Here are some pictures from the historic day at Turnberry. 1 . US President Donald Trump shakes hands with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen US President Donald Trump with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen after agreeing on a trade deal between the two economies following their meeting at Turnberry | AFP via Getty Images Photo Sales 2 . US President Donald Trump shakes hands with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen after agreeing on a trade deal between the two economies AFP via Getty Images Photo Sales 3 . US President Donald Trump (R) and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at Turnberry Trump told reporters after: "We have reached a deal. It's a good deal for everybody." The EU chief also hailed it as a "good deal". | AFP via Getty Images Photo Sales 4 . Staff and family, Bettina Anderson, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump U.S. look on as President Donald Trump and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen announce a US-EU trade deal The US-EU trade deal was announced after a meeting at Trump Turnberry golf club on July 27, 2025 in Turnberry, Scotland. | Getty Images Photo Sales

Chinese hackers have seized control. How did we let this happen?
Chinese hackers have seized control. How did we let this happen?

Telegraph

time15 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Chinese hackers have seized control. How did we let this happen?

A civilisation that cannot defend itself really should not expect to survive, and after the latest cybersecurity news, I wonder how it can. An official advisory was recently sent out to the US military, warning that all forces must now assume their networks have been breached. The enemy is inside the house. What it means is that no system connected to the internet can be defended. Our own national cybersecurity agency asked UK businesses to make this presumption in 2020. The reason this hasn't been bigger news is that we've become fatalistic and weary, as one cybersecurity attack follows another. So when we discovered in early July that Chinese hackers had gained control of Microsoft servers at hundreds of US government agencies – including the US nuclear weapons agency – it was just another hacking story. What made this one noteworthy was that there wasn't immediately a fix or a patch, Microsoft admitted last Tuesday. Incredibly, confirmation of the US military's 'assume breach' alert had to be dragged out of the Department of Defense via Freedom of Information Act requests by a campaigning non-profit called Property of the People. These developments are the latest stage in an ongoing state-sponsored Chinese campaign, in which hacking has evolved from widespread commercial espionage a decade ago into something far more threatening. The latest phases, Salt Typhoon and now Volt Typhoon, are meticulous and sophisticated. They target not just government agencies like the National Guard, and China-critical MPs like Sir Iain Duncan Smith, but also private sector companies in the energy, telecoms, transport and water sectors. Ciaran Martin, former head of NCSC, the cybersecurity centre based at GCHQ, says that China's capabilities have been transformed. 'Now think of dozens or even hundreds of [individual] hacks at the same time – 'everything, everywhere, all at once' in the words of Jen Easterly, recently departed head of the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.' Software attacks on our computer systems can create unique damage in ways that conventional warfare cannot. Let's consider two. While aerial bombing can produce spectacular instant results, targets can be disassembled prior to attack, and can be quickly rebuilt after the attack. Both happened with the recent attack on Iraq's nuclear facilities. But recovering from cyber attacks is much harder. Ask the British Library, which has still not restored all of its services. 'Printed catalogues and handlists are available in our Reading Rooms', it still advises visitors to its website. The attack took place in October 2023. A second way in which cyber attacks now present a unique challenge is the ability of Chinese hackers to 'live off the land' after they break through. Rather like special forces embedded behind enemy lines, hackers conceal themselves undetected for months or years. To the guardians of the network, they are just another innocent user. 'Both Salt and Volt Typhoon were in play for years before being detected,' writes Martin. 'And they are strategic compromises of the West on a scale hitherto unseen by any other cyber power.' Not only do we not know when the attack is over, we don't even know when it has begun. How did this happen? If I haven't depressed you enough, this is where it gets particularly troubling. Cybersecurity is a gnarly failure of accountability and regulation that spans decades of indifference, and implicates business complacency and government apathy. The internet protocols (IP) we use today are completely rotten. The great and the good of the IT and telecommunications industries spent the entire 1980s in international committees devising complex secure networking protocols, only to be met with mistrust and specifications no one really wanted. Fed up with waiting, we adopted today's protocols, which were cheap and simple to implement, but not secure. Now, the international standards bodies that might devise a successor to IP are dominated by China. When they fail, suppliers can hide behind licensing agreements and expensive lawyers. No one goes to prison for bad security design. Their customers – us – are guilty of negligence too. Salt Typhoon took advantage of a bug in Cisco routers that users had not bothered to fix for seven years. As a society, we rush to implement technologies without thinking too hard about externalities. Generative artificial intelligence (AI) opens up lots of new holes, and also lowers the bar so that even the technically unskilled can plant hacks. All in all, then, this may not seem a good time to force Britons to use a new government identity service. Especially when you know that 'red team' penetration testing proved in March that this could be penetrated by hostile foreign agents without them being detected. This is what Baroness Neville Jones calls 'a piece of critical infrastructure'. Chinese agents may already be 'living off the land' inside the One Login system, on which your government wallet has been built, and soon perhaps, your digital ID. But don't expect Peter Kyle, the Science and Technology Minister, to put the brakes on the One Login project when he's its biggest fan. To survive and prosper, we need serious and technically aware people in his position, who listen to the security professionals. Kyle appeared on Newsnight last week wearing jeans and a T-shirt and trainers, all of which were intended to signal to viewers his youthful love of digital technology. He is 54.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store