🔗 Share this article

Sir Keir Starmer traveled to north Wales this past Thursday to announce the development of a fresh nuclear energy facility. This represents a significant policy event with implications at local and countrywide levels. Yet, the prime minister did not dedicate much time in Wales to promoting solutions for the UK's energy needs. Rather, he spent it attempting to put an end to the briefing controversy within Labour's leadership, telling journalists that No 10 had not briefed against the health secretary's goals earlier this week.

As such, Sir Keir’s day acted as a small-scale example of what his premiership has evolved into more generally. Firstly, he wants his government to be performing, and to be perceived as performing, important things. On the other hand, he is unable to achieve this because of the way he – and, to an extent, the country more generally – now conducts politics and government.

The Prime Minister is unable to change the political culture on his own, but he is able to take action about his personal involvement in it. The plain fact is that he could manage the government's core much more effectively than he does. If he did this, he could discover that the nation was in less dismay about his government than it currently is, and that he was communicating his points more successfully.

Staffing Issues in No 10

A number of the issues in Downing Street relate to personnel. The interpersonal relations of any No 10 regime are difficult to discern accurately from the exterior. Yet it appears clear that Sir Keir fails to make sound staffing decisions, or maintain them. Perhaps he is too busy. Perhaps he is not really interested. However, he must to improve his performance, avoid slow progress or incompletely.

• He dithered about giving the key job of top civil servant to Chris Wormald.
• He made Sue Gray his top aide, then replaced her with Morgan McSweeney.
• He brought a Treasury figure in from the finance ministry as his deputy.
• His media advisors have chopped and changed.
• Political and policy advisers have come and gone.
• It is a mess.

Structural Challenges at the Core of Government

All premiers devote excessive time abroad and on foreign affairs, areas where Sir Keir ought to assign more tasks, and too little conversing with MPs and listening to the citizens. Prime ministers also allocate too much time doing media, which Sir Keir worsens by doing it poorly. Yet leaders cannot express surprise when their politically appointed staff, who tend to be party activists or politically ambitious, cross lines or become the focus, as Mr McSweeney now has.

The biggest issues, however, are structural. It would be beneficial to think that Sir Keir read the a think tank's March 2024 study on overhauling the government's central operations. His failure to address these matters in the summer or afterward suggests he did not. The frequently dismal performance of Labour’s time in office suggests IfG proposals like restructuring the roles of the central government office and No 10, and dividing the positions of cabinet secretary and head of the civil service, are currently critical.

The dominant political role of prime ministers far outdistances the support available to them. As a result, all aspects suffer, and many tasks are poorly executed or ignored.

This isn't Sir Keir’s fault alone. He stands as the victim of previous shortcomings as well as the author of present ones. But those who hoped Sir Keir might get a grip on the core and prioritize governmental structures have been disappointed. Sadly, the primary casualty from this failure is Sir Keir himself.