Labour

  • Streeting offers the credible option, but Starmer won’t leave

    Wes Streeting MP (Ilford North/Labour) is offering his best work for the first real projected attempt to dethrone the Prime Minister. Just as his leadership is under question by major Ministerial departures, and crisis after crisis has not seen resolution, there are Labour figures chomping at the bit.

    Streeting gave his best effort at articulating an economic vision yesterday, and in some corridors is quietly whispered about as Labour’s best chance at returning from meandering on the world stage to focus on local places.

    Wes Streeting speaking on local economy and people’s potential at an event yesterday (Credit/Source: @SkyNews/YouTube).

    Ukraine, Iran, and Israel are wearying voters, already tired of seeing out protest groups that take attention away from the real matters of life. Streeting wants to focus on work that’s on offer, not pipe dreams or new fields of play.

    But, after a landslide win and nearly halfway there, Starmer is settled and maybe even getting control over matters. As far as he sees it from his side, a trip to Evian is worth it for a G7 meeting, even if Belfast burns and Russia fires on the Channel. He’s confident of his position, and Streeting has a way to go.

  • Labour is thin on the good stuff

    The Labour government has tried and tried to push out with a comprehensive agenda that will change the policy landscape and shape the UK for years to come. It’s only failure is this has not materialised at all.

    The attempt to combat the Dover Crossings is now becoming a farcical chapter in governance and the theory that Downing Street exerts any type of central control. The numbers of boats per month aren’t an insurmountable difficulty, no matter the passenger size.

    Apart from this, perhaps the social media ban has come through as its next most energetic effort. This is absurd, considering we have no involvement in any war zones or responsibility for any significant military action of scope. The zeal for reforming social media has come at us all sideways.

    Labour is providing an agenda that is thin on the good stuff. It fails to even inspire its own. Averse perhaps to crisis, and prone to silly policy initiatives, this administration has gone wayward. It needs to find its course or it’ll lose grip completely. And we don’t think more trips abroad will help, either.

  • Labour gets more worrying by the day

    The chaos engulfing our Government inside its realms is something to behold if you look at it with the keen insight that our experts give on its true purpose. Right now, key figures are leaving offices that have an implicit involvement in the major issues. Foreign, Housing, and Defence are not small briefs right now.

    The exits are not just about international issues but also have the impression of dissatisfaction amongst their staff. It may be, as John Healey MP (Rawmarsh and Conisbrough/Labour) said, that money didn’t come through, but from whom is it supposed to come and why?

    The era of weaponised moral arguments isn’t going well in Departments that don’t singularly do it by themselves. HM Treasury isn’t inevitably of the same mind as everyone else. They’re on a different page entirely, and if few try to translate their concerns adequately enough, few will get their wishes in return.

    The belief it’s beef or gruel is equally ridiculous. Less than half of its way through, and just under two years in, and this Labour government hasn’t had time for either. The pressing issues are elsewhere. It’s simply a matter of working well and working properly. This is the argument over the small boats, too.

    Labour has crisis in its sights but many are solvable here and now, and this achievement would restore hope in government. But what is it? A short burst of hard effort, then deflation as it falls apart. Whitehall is seeing its occupants burn out, and it’s not a good look for anyone.

  • Labour of ‘26 could do better

    The performance of Labour in public is lacking the verve of scholar Tony, the policy impresario who once schooled the UK in all his tenure on the ins and outs – and rights and wrongs – of everything under the sun. He knew points, paragraphs, and bullet points like we know the craziness of crimewaves the size of the UK hitting our shores everyday.

    However, the present Labour Prime Minister isn’t doing so well in his own public wordings. The furore about social media is such a poorly handled affair, it misses the point as much as David Lammy MP (Tottenham/Labour) escaping the Epstein story to run the Ministry of Justice for a while. The lack of knowhow is coming out. It’s not good news for the ‘efficient’ workers party of size.

  • Politicians need to be careful with populism

    As the Labour party experiments with a version of populism, politicians are in need of a reminder to be careful about its use of populism.

    As a tactic, it makes for a quick win for large entities that need a streamlined operation to be guided by a figure who’s clear in their direction of play.

    A graphic
    A graphic showing a UK politician meeting a Chinese representative hoping for favourable treatment (Credit: xAI Grok/Original prompt).

    The attempt to jumpstart Andy “The Madman” Burnham is a tricky manoeuvre. While policies can be put into the mouths of everyone, the UK isn’t a basic place.

    Now, other countries are scrutinising our ways. They’re looking for clever hands, not busy bodies. Burnham is widely disregarded. He can’t promise a plan to deliver.

    No political platform that’s purely for appeal is safe. All the nasties come up. It diverts from real issues. It incites pointless debates. It makes our politics sterile.

  • Labour culture reveals a lack of purpose

    It’s more likely that random, international sets of causes will emerge from the Labour benches than the Conservative.

    While a mix of views may come from Reform UK MPs, and possibly others (like the Greens), it’s Labour that has a problem with confusion in its politics.

    It hasn’t tightened its ranks as much as it may feel it has, bringing into question what it took to get such a large election win.

    Many strategists wonder at the chaos that ensues. Andy “The Madman” Burnham is a bad choice for UK politics. He’s not respected, and is feared for his crimes.

    The so-called leadership election has pulled him out as the best so far. It embarrasses Labour figures who urge their members to do better than repeat the past.

    The disarray in issues and personalities is long overdue for review. This cannot be sustained over and against a large population with more pressing matters.

  • Starmer vs Blair is a paper-thin view of things

    The fallout between Sir Keir Starmer and Sir Tony Blair is a blockbuster event for Labour diehards, but for the rest of us it’s just a squabble between the two.

    The malaise in Labour is not going to be corrected, even in the lifespan of two of its Prime Minister’s, by petty differences that are usually based on language and nuance.

    Labour face a crisis of trust, not in its belief system, but in its ability to get the job done. Every crisis needs to be ended, and every plan needs a first step. This is what voters can’t see in the politics of the day.

  • Starmer survives, but some want him out

    The Prime Minister has avoided being forced to appear before the Privileges Committee, therefore surviving his leadership and leaving him to focus on his Plan For Change in government.

    MP’s voted 335 to 223 against the motion, suggesting the PM enjoys some broad support, even if a small number of Labour MP’s continue to criticise his tenure.

  • For Starmer, it’s a problem all too familiar

    It’s not often brought up that Civil Servants also have their own beliefs, views, and opinions because the Service is supposed to be free of such prejudicial party politics. It’s not however considered that some people become more familiar than others, and it may have been this that prejudiced a decision to clear Peter Mandelson when he shouldn’t have been given it.

    It’s not so much an issue of the party, but it can be a result of the party’s interaction in Whitehall, for instance, and in wider government. The name recognition of some people has helped them in their careers immensely, and it’s no different for Peers and those that appear in the news media often.

    This in itself is a currency of acceptance that may have persuaded some to overlook concerns that were flagged but may have seemed out of character for Mandelson. If he did need more rigour in the vetting there is a question over why it hadn’t been raised before, or volunteered as information by someone in the Intelligence services.

    The Labour party is run by its ability to get things done with the people it’s got and the absence of Mandelson may have looked like too large a gap to leave. In the political calculations of those nearer to the action, perhaps such a denial would be too late in his career, not serve the interests of the country, and deny a stronger candidate a place in an admittedly fraught period of time.

  • Starmer says he never knew – but who did?

    The Prime Minister has denied being told of a failure to clear Peter Mandelson to take up the position of Ambassador to the US before it became clear he would do.

    He implies that his Cabinet carried on believing that everything had been approved at a senior level and that nobody had been made aware of problems that were flagged.

    Prime Minister Starmer explains his position on the failure of a former colleague to get security clearance (Source: BBC).

    It’s a staggering omission from a party that promotes its broad way of organisation as the best the UK has, and the real reason why voters should trust it in the first place.

    The lack of accountability for its key figures has slowed the progress of Starmer’s term. As his approval rating struggles, he’ll have to change his strategy or exit the door.

  • Mandelson has proved snap decisions don’t work

    The end of Peter Mandelson’s appointment in America was a sage lesson for those that wonder at the right way to make decisions at Cabinet level. It’s a rare insight, as well, considering this stage of proceedings is usually the hidden part, and the exit is more the scene that counts.

    It did, but now his entry into the competitive field of Ambassadorships is being scrutinised to yet further degrees of detail. It’s not really about Jeffrey Epstein, because the Labour party shows its true colours again. Here we find quick, snappy decision making taking over a powerful office in the land.

    The Guardian’s revelation that Mandelson failed his vetting is now at the centre of the tale, finding its way into the story as a stage in the process that to some always makes the final call. For expediency, for new bridge building, or for extra peace of mind, this promotion is now seen as a disaster.

    It happened under Tony Blair, and while it feels more prolific in his era, an exception to Starmer’s golden rule of slow and steady has really blown up in his tenure. It’s a disaster of streamlined party politics, which is the hopes and dreams of the politically illiterate. They don’t get it, but it looks good.

    *A change was made to update a reference.

  • Starmer needs to grip the steering wheel

    The Prime Minister is in a fix of his own, not knowing how to progress and yet knowing that a lot lies ahead still. He’s guaranteed a place in the history books, but is it just a page rather than a chapter?

    This is the test of mettle for a Prime Minister that knows a lot of challenges lie ahead. He has to solve the small boats crisis – or Dover Crossings, here – and get on with the clear up in the rest of the UK where confusion is rife about it.

    He can – as a leader – make headway and secure a reputation for class A leadership. However, his options are slight and his chances slim.

    He needs to focus and to push through plans for the proper transaction of his ideas. He has to reassure his support base, especially after the Peter Mandelson scandal took over and scuppered it.

    The public’s support is also waning and he can’t let it slip. This is an important indicator of leadership now. If it doesn’t improve he will struggle to reassure even his party that he should stay on. It might be an early exit on the cards.

  • Labour needs a renewal of what it means to work

    The problem that we can see in the UK is that a large part of the political system is made up of a party that doesn’t seem to believe in working hard anymore.

    While it may be easy to blame this on strikes it is actually the fault of Unions that don’t really encourage hard work or even suggest that people do their full jobs.

    In my experience, Union representatives are often inadequate people who don’t really know how to navigate a modern workplace in the first place.

    This needs correcting because work-related stress is increasing. Most of it has to do with work being left undone. It frustrates and also irritates other people.

  • Labour lacks a connection they used to have

    It’s believed by researchers in the UK that 12% of true economic activity matches the politics of the Labour party. This refers to its appeal to the working classes as well as to those that identify work with social values such as justice.

    It means that Starmer’s party is hopelessly out of touch, insofar as its worded statements to people matter in a broader perspective.

    The forward march of his ranks of activists and promoters is not reaching the depths of the problems or grasping for the solutions that may help them.

    This means the party suffers a shortfall in support, not remedied since its historic win in 2024 which led to its return to power after fourteen years.

  • Starmer runs the same risk as Blair did

    “Sir Keir isn’t a King Lear,” a Labour activist once said to me, somewhat cryptically. I think it meant he’s not an imposing figure, but it differs for people how anyone comes across. There are also nuances for us all, in political circles, as to what anything means collectively.

    The current times are not favourable to the softly-softly approach of a Labour figure. Sir Tony Blair ran the same risk and he fell on his own sword, believed by many in its top ranks that he couldn’t keep up with the times anymore, so he left.

    It’s not that Sir Keir is due to leave soon, but his exit of a number of key staff has shown it won’t inevitably hold together, even if it’s led by his own intuition and activity.