Matthew Eason is an Account Director at Media Intelligence Partners
When someone’s time in power comes to an end, it is only natural that they begin to think of their legacy. What they will be remembered for, if indeed anyone will remember them.
For Sir Keir Starmer, his time is up. He had backbenchers in open revolt, frontbenchers briefing that they are to stand down, and the bizarre situation of having to support Andy Burnham’s successful effort to be elected.
What we must not forget is, in very recent memory, that Starmer was once strong enough to prevent Burnham standing in a by-election. Not so anymore. Once Burnham won in Makerfield it was over. This Monday, Starmer duly announced his resignation and now we have entered the ceremonial procession of the King in the North into No10.
But on reflection, what will Starmer be remembered for?
The first Labour Prime Minister for nearly 15 years, the man who detoxified Labour after the Corbyn years?
He and his allies will point to that supposed landslide in 2024 as his great success but, is that even worth mentioning as such?
I’d far sooner expect him to be remembered as the winner of a strange election, someone who became PM almost by accident. An election where the British people decided not to vote and marked the start of the end of the traditional two party system. After all, Starmer “swept” to power with fewer votes than Corbyn, who lost two elections, and barely more than Ed Miliband’s loss in 2015.
It was not his victory but the total loss and rejection of the Conservative Party.
Then, in office, what great victory can he really point to? This great figure, a titan of British politics. A supposed statesman with a lawyer’s attention to detail. “A return to sensible grown-up politics”.
What was he in reality? A Prime Minister who did not trust or like the people who elected him – squeezing taxpayers at every turn and banning all that he could lay his hands on. The clampdowns on free speech through new blasphemy rules or restrictions on accessing the internet in a way that the state does not approve of.
He wanted us to join that elite club of dictators and authoritarian regimes in banning VPNs.
Access to social media would require onerous and insecure registration with the proper authorities in Sir Keir’s country. We already have vetoes on the “wrong” sort of food and unhealthy habits like smoking.
What about the complete collapse of Britain as a serious voice in international diplomacy? A nation humiliated by Starmer’s bizarre insistence on trying to pay Mauritius to take the vital Chagos Islands from Britain? The appointment of Mandelson, a friend of the internationally reviled paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?
Maybe one might wish to discuss his desire to disregard his manifesto, his mandate to govern, and rejoin the EU. A proposition that remains as unpopular as ever with the British public – if only you are capable of being honest about the huge financial and political burden that this would become.
We have seen barbaric assaults on ordinary Brits. The attempted beheading in Northern Ireland and the repeated, coordinated brutalities against Jews in Britain. A murderer lying to the police while his victim was arrested and bled out at his feet. Grooming gangs across the length and breadth of Britain.
At each turn, Starmer’s government has asked you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. Instead, you must come together to reject hatred or division – a message that falls on the deaf ears of the perpetrators.
His failure to address Britain’s faded and underfunded military in a world that is once again facing the reality of hard power being the most important vehicle of diplomacy. His own Defence Secretary resigned after one delay too much. In an increasingly insecure world, with conflict and military action echoing around the globe, Starmer couldn’t muster the political will to follow through on raising defence spending by just one percent.
Economically, Britain is circling the drain with no sign of saving from Starmer’s stagflationary regime. Britain’s economy is barely moving. The country is shackled to the spiralling costs of an unchecked welfare system with rampant fraud and abuse. Over a million young men and women are not in education, employment or training. Meanwhile, Starmer’s government has chosen to tax jobs and businesses out of existence, and housebuilding rates are collapsing even faster.
Apart from trying to sell the Chagos Islands, restricting freedom and hiring those close to paedophiles, what else can we talk about that Starmer prioritised? Taxing education and doubling down on his supposedly private support for a downright dangerous assisted suicide bill? Hardly the stuff of a positively noteworthy PM.
In many ways, Starmer could not have done more to have created for himself a more pernicious and poisonous legacy. State control over thought, speech and action. A nation where trust in society is collapsing in the face of highly public assaults on the British people via violent attack and those abusing welfare or other areas of society.
What will he be remembered for? Will people even remember his minor successes?
No.
He will be a man who came to power on the backs of other politicians’ failures – successful solely at not being his opponents. A man who has proven unable to use his majority to set or stay true to a coherent policy agenda. A Prime Minister who had to back down and support the election of the rival who has forced him out of office.
To co-opt the words of a great TV show, Sir Keir Starmer – that’s your Prime Ministerial life.
Matthew Eason is an Account Director at Media Intelligence Partners
When someone’s time in power comes to an end, it is only natural that they begin to think of their legacy. What they will be remembered for, if indeed anyone will remember them.
For Sir Keir Starmer, his time is up. He had backbenchers in open revolt, frontbenchers briefing that they are to stand down, and the bizarre situation of having to support Andy Burnham’s successful effort to be elected.
What we must not forget is, in very recent memory, that Starmer was once strong enough to prevent Burnham standing in a by-election. Not so anymore. Once Burnham won in Makerfield it was over. This Monday, Starmer duly announced his resignation and now we have entered the ceremonial procession of the King in the North into No10.
But on reflection, what will Starmer be remembered for?
The first Labour Prime Minister for nearly 15 years, the man who detoxified Labour after the Corbyn years?
He and his allies will point to that supposed landslide in 2024 as his great success but, is that even worth mentioning as such?
I’d far sooner expect him to be remembered as the winner of a strange election, someone who became PM almost by accident. An election where the British people decided not to vote and marked the start of the end of the traditional two party system. After all, Starmer “swept” to power with fewer votes than Corbyn, who lost two elections, and barely more than Ed Miliband’s loss in 2015.
It was not his victory but the total loss and rejection of the Conservative Party.
Then, in office, what great victory can he really point to? This great figure, a titan of British politics. A supposed statesman with a lawyer’s attention to detail. “A return to sensible grown-up politics”.
What was he in reality? A Prime Minister who did not trust or like the people who elected him – squeezing taxpayers at every turn and banning all that he could lay his hands on. The clampdowns on free speech through new blasphemy rules or restrictions on accessing the internet in a way that the state does not approve of.
He wanted us to join that elite club of dictators and authoritarian regimes in banning VPNs.
Access to social media would require onerous and insecure registration with the proper authorities in Sir Keir’s country. We already have vetoes on the “wrong” sort of food and unhealthy habits like smoking.
What about the complete collapse of Britain as a serious voice in international diplomacy? A nation humiliated by Starmer’s bizarre insistence on trying to pay Mauritius to take the vital Chagos Islands from Britain? The appointment of Mandelson, a friend of the internationally reviled paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?
Maybe one might wish to discuss his desire to disregard his manifesto, his mandate to govern, and rejoin the EU. A proposition that remains as unpopular as ever with the British public – if only you are capable of being honest about the huge financial and political burden that this would become.
We have seen barbaric assaults on ordinary Brits. The attempted beheading in Northern Ireland and the repeated, coordinated brutalities against Jews in Britain. A murderer lying to the police while his victim was arrested and bled out at his feet. Grooming gangs across the length and breadth of Britain.
At each turn, Starmer’s government has asked you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. Instead, you must come together to reject hatred or division – a message that falls on the deaf ears of the perpetrators.
His failure to address Britain’s faded and underfunded military in a world that is once again facing the reality of hard power being the most important vehicle of diplomacy. His own Defence Secretary resigned after one delay too much. In an increasingly insecure world, with conflict and military action echoing around the globe, Starmer couldn’t muster the political will to follow through on raising defence spending by just one percent.
Economically, Britain is circling the drain with no sign of saving from Starmer’s stagflationary regime. Britain’s economy is barely moving. The country is shackled to the spiralling costs of an unchecked welfare system with rampant fraud and abuse. Over a million young men and women are not in education, employment or training. Meanwhile, Starmer’s government has chosen to tax jobs and businesses out of existence, and housebuilding rates are collapsing even faster.
Apart from trying to sell the Chagos Islands, restricting freedom and hiring those close to paedophiles, what else can we talk about that Starmer prioritised? Taxing education and doubling down on his supposedly private support for a downright dangerous assisted suicide bill? Hardly the stuff of a positively noteworthy PM.
In many ways, Starmer could not have done more to have created for himself a more pernicious and poisonous legacy. State control over thought, speech and action. A nation where trust in society is collapsing in the face of highly public assaults on the British people via violent attack and those abusing welfare or other areas of society.
What will he be remembered for? Will people even remember his minor successes?
No.
He will be a man who came to power on the backs of other politicians’ failures – successful solely at not being his opponents. A man who has proven unable to use his majority to set or stay true to a coherent policy agenda. A Prime Minister who had to back down and support the election of the rival who has forced him out of office.
To co-opt the words of a great TV show, Sir Keir Starmer – that’s your Prime Ministerial life.