In this morning's video, I note that two months into office as prime minister, Keir Starmer is claiming that we should anticipate ‘more pain' under his leadership. That's unsurprising. So far, he has provided no clue as to what he will ‘change', despite that being the theme of his election campaign. Instead, he says he will struggle to deliver what the Tories promised. As early admissions of failure go, that is spectacular.
The audio version is here:
The transcript is:
Keir Starmer has failed. Now, I know it's a little early in the lifetime of this Labour government to say that Keir Starmer is now a failure and that his government will not deliver on its promises, but I think we can be fairly confident that this is true.
Starmer promised change. That was the one word that underpinned all of the Labour Party's campaigning during the course of this year to become the government that we now have. And he's not going to deliver change.
As is readily apparent from his speech straight after the August Bank holiday weekend, he is going to, at best, deliver the plan that Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt had for the UK that they announced in March 2024.
Quite astonishingly, it seems that all of the framing of everything that he plans to do is about that plan. Even his discussion of the fact that there is a “black hole” in the finances of the country, with which I don't agree by the way, is framed around the fact that the “black hole” that he refers to was apparently inherent in what Jeremy Hunt proposed.
Starmer is saying he's got to raise £22bn simply to deliver what Sunak and Hunt planned to do. And let's be clear, what they planned to do was wholly inadequate for this country. They wanted to increase public spending at a rate of about 1. 2 per cent per annum to meet need. The fact is, that won't mean need, largely because the population of this country is probably growing at something around that rate, and the needs of this country are growing at a higher rate still. Increasing public spending by 1. 2%, in real terms is not, then, going to solve any known problem.
But it's worse than that. Starmer promised change. Nobody expected that change would mean that the two-child poverty cap would remain in place.
Nobody expected that change would be paid for by penalising pensioners.
Nobody expected that change would mean more pain. But apparently it does.
And, nobody expected that change would mean that there is no positive action that we're aware of to deal with the problems in the NHS or any other public service.
Instead, what we have is Starmer saying it's all very tough. Well, of course, it is. Being Prime Minister is tough. That's why the job is one that most rational people would not want. But he did. He's got it. And apparently he's now spending all his time moaning about the fact that this requires difficult decisions of him.
But he's not making those difficult decisions. If he wanted to make difficult decisions, he would decide what he wanted to do in government rather than do what Sunak and Hunt wanted to do in government, but apparently he and Rachel Reeves only want to deliver the Tory plan.
If he wanted to make tough decisions, he would also stand up to those civil servants in the Treasury who say the books must balance. Because, let's be clear about this; £22 billion is neither here nor there in terms of the overall level of government spending. It is almost insignificant. And therefore, he could say, “We'll simply borrow more by that amount”, and the problem is solved.
And, if he wanted to make tough decisions, he and Rachel Reeves could already give a very clear indication of where they're going with regard to raising £22 billion from instead of offering vague and somewhat unhelpful hints. A tough decision would require that he says what he intends to do. But he's prevaricating and delaying instead.
So, a tough decision. would require that he decide who is going to pay for the painful decisions he says that he's got to make. If he was true to Labour's traditions, the wealthy would pay.
And, frankly, £22 billion pounds makes very little difference to their well-being. The wealthy own around £15 trillion of wealth in the UK at present. £22 billion pounds is a lot, but is infinitesimally small in comparison to that. It is, therefore, of no consequence.
But for those on the lowest levels of income, for children in poverty, for those in need of NHS care, for children whose education will not wait, and for the climate, £22 billion matters now, but he isn't making that decision within the Labour tradition. Instead, he's backing off and trying to avoid everything.
If this is where Starmer is going, and he has given us the clearest indication now that he will be a Prime Minister who prevaricates, who goes for the easy option of agreeing with his civil servants and the mainstream political view that government spending is always a bad thing, then we know what he's going to be like now.
And the consequence that he is setting out to fail.
He will not be improving public services.
He will not be improving the lot of those who are in greatest need in our society.
He will not make the tough decisions to make sure that the rich pay the most for what is required to get us through the various crises that the Tories have left us.
He won't even make up his own mind about what agenda he wants to pursue when all he seems to want to do is to follow the Tory line.
This is a man who's become Prime Minister with no clue as to what he's going to do. And for that reason alone, I think Keir Starmer is very likely to fail.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I think the ‘change’ Labour had in mind is already accomplished – it was just a change of personnel…
‘The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.’
There is a AAMilne quote from Pooh about not having an idea where you are going therefore there is no point in hurrying.
My favourite quote about Keir Starmer is from Caitlin Johnstone a few years back:
“Keir Starmer is like if nothing and apathy had a baby and sent it to a boarding school for corporate logos.”
🙂
I think you are right on this. Prior to the election I thought Sir Keir was under-qualified for the job and lacked any sensible ideas. It turned out to be the case. What I am finding is that people who voted Labour are now reluctant to accept this. Some are keeping quiet, others backing the policies up by saying “we have to sort out the black hole.” Others seem to think “well we got the Tories out.” News to me as we have a party now carrying out policies that people would decry as Tory austerity! Its very worrying.
I voted Labour at the last election. I had three options, vote Labour and hope they would be different once in power, vote for someone else who had no chance if being elected, or not vote.
It was Tory or Labour in my constituency. No-one else had a chance. Labour won, the alternative was a new Tory candidate (the sitting Tory was not up for re-election). At least there was a faint hope that Labour would be dramatically different from the Tories, less cronyism, less corruption, more competence and maybe less austerity. I still hope that Labour will be better than the Tories, the hope is fading but there is still a faint glimmer.
At least I feel more comfortable suggesting left of centre policies to a Labour MP who might accept some of them, than to a Tory who would dismiss them out if hand. At present I am awaiting formal responses to several emails, until I get rebuffed I can live in hope that my MP is one of the good guys!
I’m getting a bit fed up with being told I shouldn’t have voted Labour. I tried that in 2010, voted Lib-Dem, got a Tory MP and the coalition!
the House of Commons Library tells us there are 109 paid ministerial posts. There are 412 Labour MPs, That leaves 303 Labour MPs without. No doubt many will hope for recognition and some accept they will never grace the front bench.
But the prospect of losing their seat will concentrate the mind. We may well see an internal revolt over policy. It is possible. Probable- I don’t know.
I’m not sure we can really grasp the difference between million, billion, and trillion. I’ve found the following helpful:
1 million seconds = 12 days
1 billion seconds = 31 years
1 trillion seconds = 31,000 years
More precise figures are at https://www.nytimes.com/1986/09/28/opinion/l-just-how-long-is-a-trillion-seconds-229186.html
Alternatively with a billion pounds you could have spent a thousand pounds a day since the birth of Jesus and still have enough for more than one hundred years. Or to use up yearly interest of 1% on a billion would mean spending £2740 a day all year. Hard work!
Why are we waiting until October for this crucial budget? Almost four months into term and still none of the major issues that the UK faces, any closer to being fixed.
We have to wait for the Office for Budget Responsibility to opine and they are only just back from the beach.
Does the Office for Budget Responsibility take as many holidays as the Royal Family? LOL! LOL!
Can Labour be prosecuted under the Trade Descriptions Act? Asking for a friend.
I could not agree more with your diagnosis.
Everyday under Laboured already, we live as Prof Tim Snyder has foretold in his book ‘The Road to Unfreedom’ (2018) – in world of perpetual strife where the only idea is that there are no new ideas and we compete with each other for misery.
It often feels like there is no hope, but the good news is that an invisible army of people and organizations are working tirelessly to change the current economic narrative. Here are a few informative examples that highlight how we can approach this shift:
https://neweconomics.org/uploads/files/Framing-the-Economy-NEON-NEF-FrameWorks-PIRC.pdf
https://heard.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Heard_report_narrative_change_draft_v3.pdf
https://neweconomics.org/uploads/files/framing-the-economy-1.pdf
Thanks
Reeves gives the distinct impression of a PPE/BOE robot, with zero imagination. AI could do a better job (at least there might be a semblance of intelligence, even if artificial).
I don’t think Starmer knows anything about economics, so he just believes everything Reeves tells him.
Disastrous combination.
Aren’t all Britain’s politicians under-equipped for the job in that they fail to understand double-entry accounting. They fail to observe the flow of money in which most is created as debt that has to be redeemed but there always has to be an element of credit which allows people to save. What we have in the UK is a singular mono-obsession with government debt and no recognition of the requirement for money that allows for net-credit (savings). The country simply can’t go on with this intellectual mindlessness because ultimately it will lead to the abandonment of democracy. Keir Starmer is clearly out of his depth but the majority of voters have no idea why!
I struggle to understand why the TUC are so quiet at the moment. I thought they were an independent organisation who have their own voice. Surely, they must be concerned by what is currently happening? So searching for some more traditional labour comment, I turned to the the Resolution Foundation’s website to see if they had any comments to make, and found nothing. I get the impression that everyone is on holiday.
So, back to the TUC whose Conference is 8-11 September in Brighton. Motion 12 is from RMT and starts
“Congress welcomes the election of a Labour government and the manifesto commitment that “there will be no return to austerity”. ……
Not sure when this is going to be discussed, but I’ll now be looking out for it.
It’s going to be interesting to hear what is said. I wonder who is going to be the Government’s main representative there?
Then, I wondered if they are dyed in the wool neoliberals? I have no idea, but if so, they really do need re-educating!
I am as baffled as you are
Why is the TUC so determined not to rock the boat?
Because we are being balloted on a pay deal – that’s why, methinks.
There may well be some boat rocking coming up over that.
If there has been a funnier yet more relevant article on the state of British politics in general and Scottish politics in partucular then I’d love to see it.
https://commonweal.scot/no-one-is-innocent-in-the-cuts-blame-game/
Robin is an old, deeply and appropriately cynical, friend of mine.