The resignation of Keir Starmer and thereafter

When Keir Starmer took over as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on July 5, 2024, after leading the Labour Party to a huge majority of 172, nobody could imagine that he would have to resign within hardly two years and attain the status of the shortest-serving Labour PM in history. The causes of his fall were numerous, but the mounting electoral pressure on Labour MPs about the party’s prospects in the next general election proved to be the last straw. His successor will be the 7th Prime Minister in a decade, a fact necessitating a deep analysis of the worrisome situation. While the UK’s parliamentary system allows political parties to change their leaders mid-term, such alterations highlight certain errors of judgement by the team captain.
When we study the reasons for Keir Starmer’s decision to step down, there seems to be no vagueness or confusion. During the last few months, the popularity of the far-right Reform UK party, led by Nigel Farage, had surged, particularly due to its anti-immigration stance. The results of the local council elections last month, in which Labour lost 1,496 seats while Reform UK secured most of them and took control of 14 important councils, were widely considered a referendum on Starmer himself. Prior to that, a series of damaging revelations relating to Starmer’s decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US, last year, embarrassed him. It was disclosed that Mandelson had originally failed his UK security vetting; however, the vetting recommendation was sidelined. Upon disclosure, Starmer claimed he was kept in the dark, a stance that led the opposition to accuse him of either lying or being grossly incompetent. The situation worsened further when Mandelson’s relations with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein became public. Mandelson was finally fired as ambassador and taken into custody by British police on charges of misconduct in public office for leaking official secrets.
Certain observers believe Keir Starmer’s position during the US/Israel war with Iran also made him unpopular in some quarters. He deliberately decided not to allow British military bases to be used for the initial wave of US-Israeli attacks. He repeatedly stressed that the British government was not in favour of “regime change from the skies” and that acting in his country’s interest was his top priority. Later, when he permitted the use of UK bases, it was conditional — only defensive actions could be undertaken to protect allies or British interests. Throughout the war, the UK consistently called for de-escalation and a negotiated settlement; this rhetoric annoyed supporters of joining the war. All these factors were important, but the decisive role was played by the resignations of various cabinet and junior ministers, particularly the departures of Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Defence Secretary John Healey, which proved to be the final nail in the coffin. Finally, Andy Burnham’s entry into parliament through the Makerfield by-election sealed the fate of the incumbent premier, Keir Starmer.
The situation described above has made it doubtful that the outgoing Prime Minister will be able to attend the NATO leaders’ summit on July 7. It was on this occasion that Keir Starmer was to finally unveil the newly crafted military spending plan, which had led to differences with outgoing Defence Secretary John Healey. It remains to be seen whether this can go ahead, since the funds for the new plan were to be arranged by rewriting the budgets of various government departments. By contrast, the fate of the upcoming UK-EU summit, dated July 22, is clear — it has been postponed, according to Antonio Costa, President of the European Council. Apart from these two points relating to the outgoing PM, a question concerning the incoming PM is being discussed in political circles. Will the new premier opt for fresh elections to secure a renewed mandate that would strengthen his position enormously, although he can already rely on a massive Labour majority in the House of Commons? Reform UK and some smaller groups are insisting on it, arguing that such a move would add enormously to the confidence and effectiveness of the incoming government. In any case, nothing would force the new PM to follow this advice — the next general election is not legally required before 2029.
The expected next Prime Minister of the UK, Andy Burnham, made his name in recent years through his experimentation in various fields as Mayor of Greater Manchester (2017 to 2026), an approach that came to be known as “Manchesterism.” He himself has insisted that Westminster should learn from it. He speaks of a model he developed by combining two factors — pro-business policies and greater public control over essential services — which he practically implemented in Manchester. His theory is most likely the outcome of his years of experience in public administration: he served as Secretary for Health (2009–10), Secretary for Culture, Media and Sport (2008–09), and Chief Secretary to the Treasury (2007–08). Burnham is identified as a socialist and is associated with Labour’s soft-left movement. He is a strong opponent of nationalism, which he describes as an “ugly brand of politics.” He is a fierce critic of the traditionally centralised, elitist Whitehall model, a strong supporter of devolving power, and considers it a rational way to achieve urban regeneration.
The rapid turnover of Prime Ministers in the UK is worrying for sensitive observers; however, the underlying reason is a stubbornly weak economy that has negatively affected incomes and living standards. UK growth has averaged around 1% per annum since 2016, and GDP per capita has been similarly uninspiring. What the incoming Prime Minister Andy Burnham intends to do to reshape the British system is the most important question. He has clearly stated that he will embark on a “rebalancing of power” away from Whitehall, as he considers the UK one of the most over-centralised countries in the world. He intends to give English regions more control in areas including housing, transport, water and energy, apart from promoting equivalent living conditions across Britain. Taxation is also on Burnham’s list of priorities, as, in his view, the UK overtaxes work while undertaxing wealth. He has plans to overhaul England’s social care system, reduce immigration by tightening visa requirements, improve employment opportunities and upgrade business-related facilities. He has also spoken on his likely foreign policy and defence-related approach, though he needs to bring more clarity to his ideas. Most notably, the incoming premier has not concealed his inclination to rejoin the European Union, though he has ruled out any referendum on the issue.
Andy Burnham’s plans and intentions are quite clear and radical, but how far he succeeds in implementing them remains to be seen. The scope of his agenda raises doubt in the mind of every political scientist. In any case, farewell to Keir Starmer, and welcome to Andy Burnham.