
‘We promised change but people aren't feeling it yet': Labour rues poor first year
'You've U-turned on your reforms, your MPs don't trust you, and markets worry that you've lost resolve on fiscal discipline. It's the epitome, isn't it, of sticking-plaster politics and chaos that you promised voters you would end?' a television journalist asked.
Initially, Starmer avoided answering the question, but he eventually addressed the fall-out from his government's chaotic handling of its welfare bill. 'I'm not going to pretend the last few days have been easy: they've been tough,' he admitted.
'I'm the sort of person that then wants to reflect on that, to ask myself what do we need to do to ensure we don't get into a situation like that again, and we will go through that process. But I also know … that we will come through it stronger.'
The jubilant crowds of flag-waving supporters that greeted the prime minister as he arrived in Downing Street on 5 July 2024, daring to hope for a brighter future after 14 long years under the Conservative party, felt like a very long time ago.
Senior members of Starmer's inner circle now quite openly admit that their first year in power has not gone as expected. 'I always knew it would be hard, but I think I was probably quite naive about just how hard it would be,' one said.
'We had a difficult fiscal inheritance and there was this sense in the country that everything was broken. We promised change but people aren't feeling it yet. And they're not in any mood to give us the benefit of the doubt,' a cabinet minister added.
Despite all the political misjudgements such as early gloominess over the economy when the country needed to feel hope, unforced errors over issues such as the winter fuel cuts and freebies and a party base unsettled over cuts to international aid and the welfare system, it is too simplistic to suggest that it has all been bad.
Decisions to raise the national minimum wage, improve workers' rights, build more affordable housing and cut NHS waiting lists have all been popular. Even more starkly 'Labour' policies such as nationalising the railways, introducing VAT on private schools fees and threatening water firm bosses over sewage have been well received.
But the government, slumping behind Nigel Farage's Reform UK in the polls and with Starmer's own personal approval ratings tanking, hasn't got the credit. Labour strategists keep themselves awake at night trying to work out where it went wrong, and what they can do about it.
So for all the reflection on the year gone by, the focus has now inevitably turned to what comes next. 'We're only 12 months in: if we can learn not just from what we've got right but also from what has not, then we still have time to get it right,' one No 10 source said.
Starmer talks of a decade of national renewal, his assumption being that Labour will win a second term, and that he'll still be at the helm of the party. But not everybody shares that view. Even though the odds are still – despite everything – of Labour being the largest party.
Some ministers believe they should focus on the first five years instead, as a way of injecting some urgency. Backbench MPs, many with small majorities and fearful of what the next election could bring, are pushing to make the most of what time they have.
They may recoil when asked about a reset, but No 10 political strategists do acknowledge there will be a 'next phase' that allows Starmer to move on from his difficult first year and get the government on to a steadier footing.
They believe the prime minister needs a big unifying message that allows him to make ideological arguments – akin to the way Tony Blair used 'modernise'.
The theme of the strategy will be 'fairness' – a word that peppered Starmer's speech on the NHS on Thursday, and which they hope they can use in a provocative way and use to pick political battles. 'It's an invitation to make proper arguments,' an aide said.
In his autumn conference speech and the run-up to the crucial political test of next May's local elections, Starmer will be able to argue there has been an imbalance in the economy or in previous political priorities that he will now set about to change.
At the heart of it, Labour wants to speak to a pervasive feeling in the country that no matter how hard you work, nothing improves, and life gets tougher and tougher.
Fairness, they argue, provides a platform to argue that big decisions – choices such as VAT on private schools or workers' rights reforms – were the right things to do. But also small ones such as investments in crumbling local heritage, which has become such a symbol of decline.
It was an argument, strategists believe, that could have been made much better, to make the case for cuts to winter fuel and the dysfunctional state of the welfare system.
Crucially, aides hope the message will resonate right across the Labour coalition, bringing together progressives to the left of the government and the more socially conservative voters who were the focus of the last election.
'Those people are in many ways often similar in circumstances but very different in values,' one senior strategist said. 'We should be a government for all those people.'
But there are some senior Labour figures, including some in cabinet and party grandees, who favour a much more explicit progressivism, to shore up Labour's own voters and take on the right when the Reform hordes are at the gates.
They believe that this is much closer to Starmer's own politics and would allow him to speak and act more like himself, addressing a view held inside and outside Westminster that he often comes across as inauthentic.
'He's been dressed up in all sorts of different incarnations, as an insurgent disruptor or the hammer of the civil service, which I don't think he's felt comfortable with,' said one ally. 'I think the reason why he went out of his way to express regret over the immigration speech where he talked about an island of strangers was because it just wasn't him.'
On the progressive wing of the party, where Labour is losing more votes, there is frustration about what many perceive to be leaning to the right in response to Reform UK.
'It's the wrong approach. We should acknowledge that people really care about small boats, about housing, about the cost of living, but have our own answers to those problems, not try to ape Reform,' said one senior MP. 'Authenticity is a big problem for Keir. It's much better that he goes out and makes a Labour case for what we want to do for the country.'
Some in No 10 believe that it would be disastrous to pivot back to the Labour base, comparing it to Ed Miliband's '35%' strategy that aimed to unite progressives but which ultimately cost Labour the 2015 election.
While Starmer is generally praised for his role on the international stage, and has strong relationships with his fellow world leaders – including, perhaps counterintuitively, Donald Trump – the same is not true of the domestic sphere.
There is a strong desire within No 10 for Starmer to reconnect with voters at home, to spend more time out in the country with ordinary people, on the campaign trail, with businesses, with industry, in hospitals – and with his own MPs.
'We have got to get him off a fucking plane,' one senior aide said. 'It becomes so easy to not think too much about what is going on at home. It has been at the root of a lot of problems.'
The party finds itself at a crossroads. Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's fabled chief of staff, told staff as they entered government that they could govern as insurgents and that power would make them more radical. But the pace of change has been frustratingly slow and some aides believe there must be a serious strategic turn to speed it up.
Many government figures compare this moment to the turbulent aftermath of the Hartlepool byelection. Starmer tells friends that he's used to people underestimating him, that it happened back then, too, yet he proved his detractors wrong by sticking to his plan.
But others are less generous. 'Nobody knows what he's thinking,' said one senior Labour figure. 'He's delegated political decision-making to Morgan. He needs to get more of a grip.'
But while advisers, including McSweeney, often get the blame for the government's woes, ultimately the buck stops with the prime minister. Veterans of Labour's last time in office believe that Starmer needs to articulate a more clearly defined purpose. 'Until and unless people know what the point of this government is … then nothing else will follow,' said one.
'What does Keir actually want? What does he stand for? For all the contradictions with Tony and Gordon, you knew they were driven by ideas. It seized them. What does Keir stand for? Whatever it is, we don't know,' said a senior Labour figure.
'It's all been show not tell. He thinks that if the government delivers gradual material change that will be enough. But it's not. It wasn't for Joe Biden. It won't be for Keir Starmer either,' said one minister.
Senior party figures worry that Starmer's reputation for being competent, even if that doesn't include political flair, has taken a battering over the past year, and that he needs to turn that round.
'Everybody thought he was going to be a more professional, competent version of the succession of failed Tories that we had before. But instead many people have got the sense that he's a further instalment of them,' one said.
Starmer's allies vehemently reject the suggestion that he can't turn things around. 'A big drum roll and clash of cymbals and fireworks wouldn't work. Keir can win a second term, not by dancing to Nigel Farage's tune, but by doing what Labour governments do in his pragmatic, hard-headed way, trying to make this country better. That seems to me a more authentic place for him, a better place for the government.'
But not everybody is as optimistic. 'I just don't know whether he'll pull it off,' one senior figure said. 'Keir is a diligent and thorough person who every day jumps out of bed and thinks what he can do for the country. He goes to bed every night dissatisfied that he's not done enough. But somehow in between those two moments something doesn't quite connect.'
Hashtags

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

South Wales Argus
15 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.

Western Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.


Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Macron blames Starmer for migrant crisis
Emmanuel Macron is demanding that Sir Keir Starmer make Britain less appealing to Channel migrants to secure a ' one in, one out deal '. The French president believes the UK bears the blame for record numbers of small boats crossing the Channel and has three key demands to reduce its 'pull factors'. Mr Macron, who arrived in Britain on Tuesday for the first state visit by a European head of state since Brexit, was due to announce the new agreement with the Prime Minister at an Anglo-French summit on Thursday. A deal with Paris would allow Britain to legally return illegal Channel migrants to France for the first time since Brexit. But Sir Keir is scrambling to rescue the pact after five EU member states bearing the brunt of European arrivals raised concerns that a deal would see them forced to take more migrants. The Telegraph understands that Mr Macron wants Sir Keir to crack down on the UK's black market for labour and welfare payments and make family reunification for genuine asylum seekers easier as conditions for the deal. An Elysée source warned that Mr Macron expected measures 'addressing the root causes of the factors that attract people to the United Kingdom', adding: 'These causes must also be addressed by the British.' They added that France would be willing to discuss ways to stop more small boats leaving its shores during the Anglo-French summit on Thursday. Mr Macron's allies have said the ease in which migrants can get under-the-table employment means Britain is viewed as 'an El Dorado' – a city of riches, where it is easy to work. The demands emerged as Mr Macron enjoyed a day rich with pomp and pageantry during a visit celebrating what the Elysée called a 'pragmatic rapprochement'. After being greeted at RAF Northolt by the Prince and Princess of Wales and treated to a royal procession, he addressed Parliament before the King hosted a state banquet in his honour in Windsor Castle on Tuesday evening. Starmer must address 'pull factors' In Westminster in the afternoon, Mr Macron went public with his concerns, telling an audience including Sir Keir that the British Government would have to address 'pull factors' to drive down migrant numbers. Channel crossings have hit a record high this year with 20,600 migrants so far, the highest since the first arrivals in 2018. Mr Macron said that a third of migrants entering the EU's Schengen area illegally were aiming for the UK as their final destination. He said: 'France and the United Kingdom have a shared responsibility to address irregular migration with humanity, solidarity and fairness.' The president added: 'We will only arrive at a lasting and effective solution with action at the European level [...] as well as addressing migration pull factors. 'But let's be clear we will deliver together, as this is a clear issue for our countries.' He also warned that French and British societies risk 'growing apart' and that Brexit was a 'regrettable' decision, although he said he respected it. Mr Macron is making three demands to Sir Keir to get their 'one in, one out' deal over the line in time for Thursday. The French president wants to make it harder for illegal immigrants to work in Britain. While asylum seekers are not allowed to work legally, the French view is there are not enough controls to prevent them from doing so. The gig economy and delivery drivers are seen as areas that can be easily exploited, and Britain does not have European-style ID cards. Mr Macron also sees benefits for migrants successfully granted asylum as another pull factor attracting migrants to Britain and another root cause that should be addressed. Legal routes for genuine asylum seekers His third demand centres on the number of small boat migrants trying to reach their families who are already in the UK. Mr Macron wants Britain to accept one genuine asylum seeker from France who wants to rejoin a family member in Britain for each illegal migrant France takes back. It is thought migrants will be less incentivised to make the dangerous crossing if they have a legal route into Britain. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, has already prioritised a crackdown on illegal foreign workers and a blitz on delivery drivers, announced last week, in an attempt to counter criticism of the UK as a 'soft touch'. Raids on companies suspected of employing illegal workers passed 10,000 in the past year, a 48 per cent rise and fines for doing so have tripled to £60,000. In May, a Telegraph investigation revealed that asylum seekers housed in Home Office hotels are paying off people smuggler debts by illegally working as food delivery riders. Meanwhile, a new law will make it a legal requirement for all companies, including the gig economy, to check workers are legal. Plans are being drawn up to throw small boats migrants working illegally out of taxpayer-funded hotels and widen European-style digital IDs for overseas citizens. The King addressed the small boats crisis on Tuesday night at the state banquet, saying: 'Our security services and police will go further still to protect us against the profound challenges of terrorism, organised crime, cyber-attacks and irregular migration across the English Channel.' He added that there are no borders between Britain and France in the nations' joint quest to solve 'complex threats'. Earlier in the day, the King was seen deep in conversation with the French leader, with whom he shares a good relationship, during a carriage ride through Windsor. The King also kissed the hand of Brigitte Macron, the president's wife. More than 950 servicemen and women from all three armed services, and 70 horses, took part in the ceremonial welcome, from troops lining the carriage procession route to a guard of honour featuring guardsmen from two of the British Army's oldest regiments the Grenadier Guards and Scots Guards. Later in the evening, the state dinner at Windsor Castle saw the Princess of Wales attend her first evening banquet since November 2023, before her cancer diagnosis. She and Mr Macron were among guests who enjoyed a Franco-British menu created by Raymond Blanc at which the King raised a toast to the French in a speech peppered with jokes. Speaking partly in French, the King said: 'The summit that you and the Prime Minister will hold in London this week will deepen our alliance and broaden our partnership still further.' Addressing the French president as well as Sir Mick Jagger and Sir Elton John, he joked: 'We would not be neighbours if we did not have our differences' with 'amicable competition and occasionally even, dare I say, confusion' across cultures.