Removing Starmer solves the problem of an unpopular leader, but without a coherent alternative agenda his successor won’t fare much better
L
abour has spent much of the past year paralysed by competing fears. MPs’ dread of facing voters with Keir Starmer as prime minister has been kept in check by their recoil from the process of replacing him. They know the prime minister is an electoral liability; they know that the electorate takes a dim view of chaotic, regicidal parties that showcase disunity and factional rancour when they are supposed to be running the country.
Impatience with Starmer’s leadership has, until now, been neutralised by reluctance to gamble on a contest that might replace him with someone worse. Last week’s local and devolved ballots changed the calculus. Labour MPs now have indisputable evidence that they are cruising towards nationwide electoral oblivion. A growing number think the trajectory will not change if the leader stays the same.
The results were catastrophic by any measure, but that wasn’t the only factor provoking backbench demands for Starmer’s departure, or the flurry of frontbench resignations. The prime minister’s response exemplified traits that colleagues find infuriating about his leadership. He took responsibility for Labour’s electoral evisceration in terms that were more defiant than humble.
