Keir Starmer's political journey has been described as Shakespearean: entering Parliament just 11 years ago, leading Labour to an unexpected election win, and then squandering it within two years. His downfall reflects an unprecedented era of fractured voter loyalties and a fragmented two-party system, but even his allies admit he was at fault.
Historian Anthony Seldon, who has written biographies of every prime minister from John Major to Rishi Sunak, identified three fundamental failures: Starmer never understood the job of prime minister, never knew what he wanted to do—especially on economic policy—and never knew whom to appoint. 'Once you've got those three things happening, it's never going to work,' Seldon said.
Critics point to a chasm between Starmer's campaigning and governing skills. One staffer recalled asking for a plan to govern before the July 2024 election and being told none existed. After the win, instead of a blitz of major policies, the PM toured the UK meeting mayors, prompting many to say, 'This can't be it.'
Some blame Sue Gray, Starmer's chief of staff, for a botched start; others fault Starmer for failing to adapt from opposition leader to prime minister-in-waiting. Political scientist David Runciman noted that Labour had two years to prepare after Liz Truss's appointment of Kwasi Kwarteng as chancellor but did not.
Gray was replaced by Morgan McSweeney, whose main legacy was the controversial appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to Washington. Like Boris Johnson, Starmer repeatedly changed his top team, only to realise the problem was himself. One Labour official said Starmer's tendency to devolve authority to aides worked at the Crown Prosecution Service and in opposition but not in government, leading to inconsistency and conflicting visions.
