
Kuenssberg: Starmer's first year ends in shambles. What now?
Westminster has rushed to its default of recent years - salivating over spats and splits, chaos and confusion. But whether that enrages or entertains you, the bald facts here matter to everyone: a government that can't pass laws in Parliament can't effectively wield power. Prime ministers that can't effectively wield power can't get things done.So can Labour move on from this almighty mess?
A year of 'unintended consequences'
The welfare vote fiasco is far from the first thing that has gone wrong. "They can fix it," one Whitehall source says, but "they have to realise they have caused it and smarten up how they make decisions".But Labour has had a whole "year of unintended consequences", as one MP described it. That's a diplomatic way of saying it has made plenty of mistakes and a lot has gone wrong during its first year back in No 10.If nothing else, this Government has lost the chance to make a good first impression. And some of the events have been baffling at best, and worrying at worst - Starmer tripping over leaving No 10 today, the Chancellor having tears running down her face.As for the welfare row, one member of the government tells me that this nodded to a far broader issue within the party: it has been a "coming together of so many things that have been simmering". It is, they add, self inflicted.A senior government source says the situation "is disappointing but not overly concerning". You might wonder if they ought to sound a bit more worried.
What has been illustrated this week is that the leadership has not understood what its rank and file are willing to tolerate. And management of the party has been found sorely lacking, spectacularly so.Ironically one of the reasons some MPs have been so cross, even before this week, is because "the mismanagement creates a fog and a funk", where potentially punter-friendly measures, like providing more free school meals and increasing the minimum wage, are drowned out.
No 10 versus the backbenches
What there is, in the wake of the this week's humiliation, is an acknowledgement that things will have to be different. A senior source in government says "we can't leave as much of a gap between ministers and backbenchers", admitting "we'll have to be better at bringing them in".The prime minister "now realises he'll have to be more into the detail", one minister says. Many insiders believe that there still needs to be a much better functioning "centre", in other words Starmer's own power base in No 10.It is no longer the "spectacularly ineffective, 70s farce" of the early weeks in No 10 that one senior figure describes, when it took days to work out exactly who was to do what; when Sue Gray and Morgan McSweeney were vying for authority; and when there was near mutiny over pay. But the source says "the legacy of these things takes time to catch up".
Inside No 10, there has been acknowledgement it needs to run better, to improve the way decisions are made across Whitehall, well before this week's humiliation.The way power is spread across SW1 and No 10 makes it "an incredibly weak centre of government, and that was a real surprise for us", say those insiders. "If we accept that No 10 will never be a White House then you need to empower other people to make better government decisions", they say.But others say there is a fundamental need in No 10 for the prime minister and his top team to be more concerned with "the absolute basics" of politics, warning sometimes there is a tone of being "sanctimonious" not wanting to "do the actual business of politics, even if its grubby". In other words, they can complain about the structures of Whitehall, or the difficulties of what they inherited, but, some argue, they struggle to look in the mirror."Everyone needs to do better" including the political team, one MP argues. That might include doing fewer things, but much more effectively. One minister argues "there'll have to be far fewer priorities – small boats, the NHS, welfare and the cost of living … everything else will have to wait".
Reasons to be optimistic
Starmer has been reminded, painfully this week, that the normal activity of politics – charming, cajoling, even sometimes menacing your party, still has to be done even if a party has hordes of MPs.A majority of this scale is an insurance policy, not free rein. Governments of any flavour are in trouble if the relationship between those at the top and those at the bottom break down. If links inside the party are frayed it becomes harder to present a compelling front to the public.No 10 must develop "more emotional intelligence", and fast, one MP argues. They believe that Starmer's "human instincts need to get much sharper in year two because of what has happened in year one".Labour's vast, not so new ranks, are not willing to be bossed around.But many MPs, advisors, ministers and party insiders I've spoken to can find reasons to be optimistic, even as the embarrassment of the last seven days stings. Spin forward to the summer of 2026 and they predict that the party will be in a much better place. "People will start to notice," as one MP puts it.Another adviser says "there is hope" – progress in the NHS will "take on more potency".
"We have set in train a whole bunch of things, the planning changes, big visible projects, and money for the NHS," says another MP - and voters will see, "maybe there is more going on than we thought".Another source enthuses that Labour is stacking up progress towards its target of building 1.5 million homes by 2029; that there will be new laws on the statute books rather than in the debating chamber, that protect renters; and that new rights will be given to workers.Certainly, this spring and summer has seen a flurry of announcements that set a quicker tempo. Downing Street is now "making better, more political decisions – on industry, on investment", according to one senior figure.Another senior MP hopes "we have now passed a tipping point where there is suddenly a lot happening".But the question now is, will anybody notice?
Starmer has never been a showman
It's accepted that ministers failed to make their arguments properly to their own party when it came to the welfare mess this week. One minister told me that if they had made a better case, earlier on, they would have been able to get the plans through and avoid all the embarrassment.Telling the government's story better to the public is absolutely vital if Starmer is to make any progress towards restoring even a fraction of Labour's popularity from this time last year. This is not a revelation to Starmer's inner circle.They have always been aware that he is not a showman or a politician who can always smoothly adapt to the public situation he finds himself in, choose he right words, or convey empathy or warmth.
There is a determination to tell the story better, to define the incredibly broad "change" message that won the election, to move to more specifics, perhaps even spelling out a new "social contract" – a rhetorical tool used by both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, during their time in power. To do this, MPs tell me that Starmer needs to not only work out exactly how to explain his project but to care deeply about getting it across."Where's the hope?" says one MP. "He needs to want it from his team, to tell the story. If he doesn't see the value in it, and they don't hire for it, then they're not going to get it."
The world wreaking havoc
There is a scenario where Labour uses its 12 months of turmoil and learns from it. Starmer's allies say he has so often been underestimated. When the party lost the 2021 Hartlepool by-election, he considered quitting, but instead, he fought back.Now they could cross their fingers and hope that signs of progress on the NHS turn into a convincing trend. That the big building blocks the government has put in place in the hope of giving the economy a kick start to come good. And that the situation in the Middle East doesn't spiral into anything even more dangerous, and potentially costly to the economy.But would you bet on it?Looking at the mess over the welfare plans you might not be confident, yet it would be ludicrous to conclude that the first year in office has been so bad, and the circumstances so tough, that they're a busted flush.But many MPs and Labour figures worry about what is going on in the rest of the world. "World War Three?" one of them says - they're not quite joking. The US going into recession, further spikes in the oil price, cyber attacks on this country from adversaries like Iran and Russia - there are all sorts of pressures outside the government's control that could wreak havoc with the economy.
Don't forget there will be a budget in the Autumn, with a broad expectation that more tax rises could be on the way – partly because of the costs of international turmoil, partly because of long term stubborn problems in the UK, and partly because of the consequences of the government's own choices.The backdrop to year one in government has been incredibly difficult because of these myriad factors. In the next year, the overall context may not get much easier, if at all.What happens in the rest of the world could "obliterate" the budget choices the chancellor has already made. If the economy turns for the worse because of factors around the world, all bets are off.One MP expressed some sympathy for No 10. As they put it, "What is the bandwidth when you have Israel, Iran, welfare, and the economy to deal with? There is no lightness in politics."The risk now is that the growing pains of year one could become embedded political problems in year two. After the welfare struggle, the winter fuel backtrack, and with genuine unhappiness on the backbenches, it is possible that Parliament becomes a regular obstacle for the government."Worst case?" says an influential figure on the left, "you'll have a big collective number [in the Commons] saying, well, you are not going to do it", leaving Downing Street as an administration with a big majority but only a small chance of getting things done."We might just continue to wobble," adds a senior source, "we have such a huge majority we should be able to be confident and stride out together – but the worst case is, we are still drowning" this time next year.
Local elections will be held in May next year, and the results will be incredibly important. The best case scenario at the ballot box? A member of the government says, "Next year is essentially like mid-terms – we could win in Scotland, we do well in Wales and show at least some progress in England."But the worst case scenario, with Reform gnawing at Labour's vote from the right, and the Liberal Democrats and Greens from the left is "disastrous results in the locals", says one No 10 source. They predict that Labour is unlikely to hold on in Wales, that it will fail to get far in Scotland - and before long, you're in a "cycle of insecurity", one senior MP warns.
Blood in the water
And in the worst case scenario then? There are fears too that relationships in the party's top echelons might splinter, some with their own ambitions, wondering if they could prosper as a result of Starmer's difficulties. A senior figure in the Labour movement warns, "you have some people smelling blood in the water – there is some bad behaviour in that Cabinet and people ready to manoeuvre".One senior figure reckons questions might be asked about Starmer's leadership. "It is bananas", they say, but it is not entirely impossible to imagine that within a couple of years of July 2024's history making win, there could be moves against him.Another senior source even says, "I don't think there is a cat in hell's chance he leads us into the election".That talk isn't taken seriously in No 10. "There is no evidence at all of any serious attempt taking shape," one source says. Another MP tells me, "It's ridiculous, it would undermine the thing we are most concerned about which is stopping the chaos of the Tory years."Yet another, who argues that it would be foolhardy to question whether Starmer will be the leader to take Labour into the next general election, nonetheless acknowledges the conversation is out there."It is mindblowing, but people do go there that quickly – they do talk about it."
Could Starmer's bloodymindedness pay off?
It was Starmer and his team's mission not just to win, but to show a sceptical public that government could actually be a force for good in their lives, not a flawed institution attached to hordes of bickering politicians more interested in the sound of their own voices than getting anything done.To make that happen they need their plans to work – whether it's building houses, or bringing down NHS waiting lists, reducing the number of small boats crossing the Channel, or filling potholes, or incredibly fraught areas such as overhauling welfare or special needs education, or social care.There's an almost universal acceptance too, throughout Labour, that the government must get better at telling its story. They need to do this to recover in the polls, and avoid a situation where even after two years of a government with an enormous majority, and tens of billions of public cash being spent, the public is still angry, still unconvinced that politicians are ineffective at best - and harmful at worst.A party veteran warns, "They allowed the heart of the Labour government [to] be almost unfathomable – they must recover the heart, until that is in place, no one will get what we are about."
But bluntly, as its been obvious in the last week, and over the last year, multiple sources say this still young government needs to improve if they are to avoid squandering the huge opportunity it still has – not just No 10, not just the civil service, not just party managers, not just the Cabinet but, "it's everyone's job", a minister says.In the last 12 months, it's been perhaps surprising, as one Whitehall source suggests, that Labour "seems to have been bewildered by the normal business of politics". There is hope among many Labour insiders I spoke to that Starmer's ability to keep going, relentlessly, however bad the circumstances, will ultimately pay off, through sheer bloodymindedness, they will be rewarded in the end – not with love, but a grudging respect from the electorate by 2029.But the question for the next 12 months is whether the prime minister and his party, can put this year's painfully gained wisdom to good use.
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.

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


Sky News
28 minutes ago
- Sky News
One year of Starmer: Nine charts that tell us whether Labour's first year has been a success or failure
It might feel like it's been even longer for the prime minister at the moment, but it's been a whole year since Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Party won a historic landslide, emphatically defeating Rishi Sunak's Conservatives and securing a 174-seat majority. Over that time, Sir Keir and his party have regularly reset or restated their list of milestones, missions, targets and pledges - things they say they will achieve while in power (so long as they can get all their policies past their own MPs). We've had a look at the ones they have repeated most consistently, and how they are going so far. Overall, it amounts to what appears to be some success on economic metrics, but limited progress at best towards many of their key policy objectives. From healthcare to housebuilding, from crime to clean power, and from small boats to squeezed budgets, here are nine charts that show the country's performance before and after Labour came to power, and how close the government are to achieving their goals. Cost of living On paper, the target that Labour have set themselves on improving living standards is by quite a distance the easiest to achieve of anything they have spoken about. They have not set a specific number to aim for, and every previous parliament on record has overseen an increase in real terms disposable income. The closest it got to not happening was the last parliament, though. From December 2019 to June 2024, disposable income per quarter rose by just £24, thanks in part to the energy crisis that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine. By way of comparison, there was a rise of almost £600 per quarter during the five years following Thatcher's final election victory in 1987, and over £500 between Blair's 1997 victory and his 2001 re-election. After the first six months of the latest government, it had risen by £144, the fastest start of any government going back to at least 1954. As of March, it had fallen to £81, but that still leaves them second at this stage, behind only Thatcher's third term. VERDICT: Going well, but should have been more ambitious with their target Get inflation back to 2% So, we have got more money to play with. But it might not always feel like that, as average prices are still rising at a historically high rate. Inflation fell consistently during the last year and a half of Rishi Sunak's premiership, dropping from a peak of 11.1% in October 2022 to exactly 2% - the Bank of England target - in June 2024. It continued to fall in Labour's first couple of months, but has steadily climbed back up since then and reached 3.4% in May. When we include housing costs as well, prices are up by 4% in the last year. Average wages are currently rising by just over 5%, so that explains the overall improvement in living standards that we mentioned earlier. But there are signs that the labour market is beginning to slow following the introduction of higher national insurance rates for employers in April. If inflation remains high and wages begin to stagnate, we will see a quick reversal to the good start the government have made on disposable income. VERDICT: Something to keep an eye on - there could be a bigger price to pay in years to come 'Smash the gangs' One of Starmer's most memorable promises during the election campaign was that he would 'smash the gangs', and drastically reduce the number of people crossing the Channel to illegally enter the country. More than 40,000 people have arrived in the UK in small boats in the 12 months since Labour came to power, a rise of over 12,000 (40%) compared with the previous year. Labour have said that better weather in the first half of this year has contributed to more favourable conditions for smugglers, but our research shows crossings have also risen on days when the weather is not so good. VERDICT: As it stands, it looks like 'the gangs' are smashing the government Reduce NHS waits One of Labour's more ambitious targets, and one in which they will be relying on big improvements in years to come to achieve. Starmer says that no more than 8% of people will wait longer than 18 weeks for NHS treatment by the time of the next election. When they took over, it was more than five times higher than that. And it still is now, falling very slightly from 41.1% to 40.3% over the 10 months that we have data for. So not much movement yet. Independent modelling by the Health Foundation suggests that reaching the target is "still feasible", though they say it will demand "focus, resource, productivity improvements and a bit of luck". VERDICT: Early days, but current treatment isn't curing the ailment fast enough Halve violent crime It's a similar story with policing. Labour aim to achieve their goal of halving serious violent crime within 10 years by recruiting an extra 13,000 officers, PCSOs and special constables. Recruitment is still very much ongoing, but workforce numbers have only been published up until the end of September, so we can't tell what progress has been made on that as yet. We do have numbers, however, on the number of violent crimes recorded by the police in the first six months of Labour's premiership. There were a total of 1.1m, down by 14,665 on the same period last year, a decrease of just over 1%. That's not nearly enough to reach a halving within the decade, but Labour will hope that the reduction will accelerate once their new officers are in place. VERDICT: Not time for flashing lights just yet, but progress is more 'foot patrol' than 'high-speed chase' so far Build 1.5m new homes One of Labour's most ambitious policies was the pledge that they would build a total of 1.5m new homes in England during this parliament. There has not yet been any new official data published on new houses since Labour came to power, but we can use alternative figures to give us a sense of how it's going so far. A new Energy Performance Certificate is granted each time a new home is built - so tends to closely match the official house-building figures - and we have data up to March for those. Those numbers suggest that there have actually been fewer new properties added recently than in any year since 2015-16. Labour still have four years to deliver on this pledge, but each year they are behind means they need to up the rate more in future years. If the 200,000 new EPCs in the year to March 2025 matches the number of new homes they have delivered in their first year, Labour will need to add an average of 325,000 per year for the rest of their time in power to achieve their goal. VERDICT: Struggling to lay solid foundations Clean power by 2030 Another of the more ambitious pledges, Labour's aim is for the UK to produce 95% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030. They started strong. The ban on new onshore wind turbines was lifted within their first few days of government, and they delivered support for 131 new renewable energy projects in the most recent funding round in September. But - understandably - it takes time for those new wind farms, solar farms and tidal plants to be built and start contributing to the grid. In the year leading up to Starmer's election as leader, 54% of the energy on the UK grid had been produced by renewable sources in the UK. That has risen very slightly in the year since then, to 55%, with a rise in solar and biomass offsetting a slight fall in wind generation. The start of this year has been unusually lacking in wind, and this analysis does not take variations in weather into account. The government target will adjust for that, but they are yet to define exactly how. VERDICT: Not all up in smoke, but consistent effort is required before it's all sunshine and windmills Fastest economic growth in the G7 Labour's plan to pay for the improvements they want to make in all the public services we have talked about above can be summarised in one word: "growth". The aim is for the UK's GDP - the financial value of all the goods and services produced in the country - to grow faster than any other in the G7 group of advanced economies. Since Labour have been in power, the economy has grown faster than European rivals Italy, France and Germany, as well as Japan, but has lagged behind the US and Canada. The UK did grow fastest in the most recent quarter we have data for, however, from the start of the year to the end of March. VERDICT: Good to be ahead of other similar European economies, but still a way to go to overtake the North Americans No tax rises Without economic growth, it will be difficult to keep to one of Chancellor Rachel Reeves' biggest promises - that there will be no more tax rises or borrowing for the duration of her government's term. Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said last month that she is a 'gnat's whisker' away from being forced to do that at the autumn budget, looking at the state of the economy at the moment. That whisker will have been shaved even closer by the cost implications of the government's failure to get its full welfare reform bill through parliament earlier this week. And income tax thresholds are currently frozen until April 2028, meaning there is already a "stealth" hike scheduled for all of us every year. 5:03 But the news from the last financial year was slightly better than expected. Total tax receipts for the year ending March 2025 were 35% of GDP. That's lower than the previous four years, and what was projected after Jeremy Hunt's final Conservative budget, but higher than any of the 50 years before that. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) still projects it to rise in future years though, to a higher level than the post-WWII peak of 37.2%. The OBR - a non-departmental public body that provides independent analysis of the public finances - has also said in the past few days that it is re-examining its methodology, because it has been too optimistic with its forecasts in the past. If the OBR's review leads to a more negative view of where the economy is going, Rachel Reeves could be forced to break her promise to keep the budget deficit from spiralling out of control. OVERALL VERDICT: Investment and attention towards things like violent crime, the NHS and clean energy are yet to start bearing fruit, with only minuscule shifts in the right direction for each, but the government is confident that what's happened so far is part of its plans. Labour always said that the house-building target would be achieved with a big surge towards the back end of their term, but they won't be encouraged by the numbers actually dropping in their first few months. Where they are failing most dramatically, however, appears to be in reducing the number of migrants making the dangerous Channel crossing on small boats. The economic news, particularly that rise in disposable income, looks more healthy at the moment. But with inflation still high and growth lagging behind some of our G7 rivals, that could soon start to turn. The Data and Forensics


South Wales Guardian
2 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Some consequences of Palestine Action ban ‘overstated', says High Court judge
Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from banning the group as a terrorist organisation, before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. Judge Mr Justice Chamberlain refused to grant the temporary block, finding there was a 'strong public interest in maintaining the order in force'. Lawyers for Palestine Action will now make a last-minute bid at the Court of Appeal to challenge this decision, as the ban is expected to come into force at midnight. In a 26-page judgment, Mr Justice Chamberlain said that 'some of the consequences feared by the claimant and others who have given evidence are overstated' if the temporary block was refused, but a later challenge against the ban succeeded. He continued: 'It will remain lawful for the claimant and other persons who were members of Palestine Action prior to proscription to continue to express their opposition to Israel's actions in Gaza and elsewhere, including by drawing attention to what they regard as Israel's genocide and other serious violations of international law. 'They will remain legally entitled to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests.' He added: 'It follows that it is hyperbole to talk of the claimant or others being 'gagged' in this respect, as the claimant has alleged. 'They could not incur criminal liability based on their past association with a group which was not proscribed at the time. 'That said, there is no doubt that there will be serious consequences if the order comes into effect immediately and interim relief is refused.' The judge later said that if people choose to continue to express support for Palestine Action post-proscription, they may face criminal consequences, adding: 'This, however, is the intended effect of the order. It is how it achieves its aim of disrupting the activities of the proscribed organisation.' The proposal to ban the group was approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords earlier this week and would make membership and support for the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Some 81 organisations are already proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Hamas, al Qaida and National Action. At the High Court hearing on Friday, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, asked the court to suspend the 'ill-considered' and 'authoritarian abuse of statutory power' until a hearing in the wider legal challenge, due around July 21. The hearing later in July is expected to deal with whether Ms Ammori can bring a High Court challenge over the planned proscription. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the High Court there was an 'insuperable hurdle' in the bid to temporarily block the banning of the group, adding it could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Following the High Court's decision on Friday, Ms Ammori said: 'The Home Secretary is rushing through the implementation of the proscription at midnight tonight despite the fact that our legal challenge is ongoing and that she has been completely unclear about how it will be enforced, leaving the public in the dark about their rights to free speech and expression after midnight tonight when this proscription comes into effect. 'Hundreds of thousands of people across the country have expressed support for Palestine Action by joining our mailing list, following and sharing our social media content and signing petitions, and many, including iconic figures like Sally Rooney, say they will continue to declare 'we are all Palestine Action' and speak out against this preposterous proscription, demonstrating how utterly unworkable it will be.'


North Wales Chronicle
2 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Palestine Action to make Court of Appeal bid at evening hearing over terror ban
Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from banning the group as a terrorist organisation before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. The move was to come into force at midnight after High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain refused Ms Ammori's bid for a temporary block. But lawyers on behalf of the group will now bring their case to the Court of Appeal in a bid to challenge the decision at a hearing due to begin at 8pm on Friday. At a short, urgent preliminary appeal hearing, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr asked Raza Husain KC, representing Ms Ammori: 'If this matter is going ahead, you need a decision from us by then, do you?' Mr Husain replied: 'Indeed.' Baroness Carr, sitting with Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis, said the hearing would last an hour, refusing a bid to extend it to 90 minutes. She said: 'We're less than five hours away, we've got to make our minds up on what we've got.' The head of the judiciary in England and Wales added: 'Both sides, if there was any prospect of an appeal, ought to have had all of these matters well in hand, if you were going to come to the Court of Appeal and ask for a decision by midnight. 'We are here now. We will do our best.' In his decision refusing the temporary block, Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Shortly after the decision was handed down, Ms Ammori said that she would be 'seeking an urgent appeal to try to prevent a dystopian nightmare of the Government's making'. She added: 'The Home Secretary is rushing through the implementation of the proscription at midnight tonight despite the fact that our legal challenge is ongoing and that she has been completely unclear about how it will be enforced, leaving the public in the dark about their rights to free speech and expression after midnight tonight when this proscription comes into effect. 'Hundreds of thousands of people across the country have expressed support for Palestine Action by joining our mailing list, following and sharing our social media content and signing petitions, and many, including iconic figures like Sally Rooney, say they will continue to declare 'we are all Palestine Action' and speak out against this preposterous proscription, demonstrating how utterly unworkable it will be.'