Keir Starmer's ascent from Labour Party leader to Prime Minister of the UK was met with high expectations following his landslide victory in the July 2024 general election. However, beneath the surface of this electoral triumph lay significant challenges that would ultimately test the party's new leader at the highest office.
The cracks began to show even before Labour took power, as staff members revealed a lack of clear policy objectives and a governing strategy upon entering Downing Street. This apparent failure to adapt from an opposition-focused approach to one of active governance has been attributed by some to Starmer's own inability to define the role of Prime Minister and articulate a clear vision for his government.
Historian Anthony Seldon, who has chronicled several Prime Ministers, observed that Starmer "never worked out what the job was," pointing to a fundamental disconnect between his effectiveness as opposition leader and performance in office. Sources close to the former PM suggest that this disconnect was exacerbated by an inability to make effective appointments, with some citing the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to Washington as 'disastrous'.
The tenure of Starmer's Chief of Staff, Morgan McSweeney, also faced challenges, particularly in relation to key personnel decisions. While replacing Sue Gray, who was seen by some as ill-suited for the role, may have been a necessary step, it highlighted broader issues with Labour's transition from opposition to government.
Political scientist David Runciman noted that Labour had ample time – approximately two years following Liz Truss' premiership – to prepare for government, a period that was not effectively utilised. This failure to adapt has drawn parallels with the Boris Johnson era, where the central issue lay ultimately with the leader rather than their aides.
Reports also suggest Starmer often delegated significant authority, sometimes appearing more as a figurehead than a decisive leader. This dynamic raises questions about his ability to navigate the complexities of government and make tough decisions in times of crisis, leaving some to wonder whether Labour's landslide victory was a double-edged sword that ultimately hindered rather than helped the party's chances of success.