You are right Peter. If this government fails, and that's what it's doing just now, for the reasons you set out, a great national tragedy awaits us. In my view, the PM is the key. He needs a much better team around him - people who themselves could almost be PM but who, recognising the national emergency, want Keir to succeed. The job of PM is, anyway, too big for one person these days - even without some of Keir Starmer's clear deficiencies.
Digital ID a good idea? No thanks. Blairite authoritarianism again. Anyway you can write what you like, Starmer hasn’t got it in him. He’s not a leader. You know what this post reeks of? Frustration and desperation.
Great piece. What has continued to shock me is how often the Government has ended up on the back foot following its own policy announcements. Digital ID is a good example. A good policy decision but shockingly communicated and now seemingly forgotten by the Government. They're struggling to get a grip and set the agenda.
You are essentially speaking the “blindingly obvious” for those of us who contemplate politics.
Your call for change. As Kier said to me in a casual private conversation in 2018 re appearing on Andrew Marr the next day, he said “I can’t change my personality, people need to take me as I am”. It is very evident from his performance on Laura yesterday he remains true to form.
But Kier isn’t the problem. The antiquated democratic system we operate is the principal concern. This was well articulated by Dominic Cummings in his recent interview by the Spectator. What he or indeed most of the political pundits do not appreciate is that it is now possible to rebuild our dilapidated democracy.
You sadly provide little feedback to the well considered posts that are submitted - contra Dec 29th posting(!) Thats what I thought Substacks were all about.
A big part of ‘swagger’ would be to give a great big metaphorical F.U. to the Mail & the rest of the Tory rags.
Just as with Reform, Starmer’s government wastes unconscionable amounts of time & energy trying to please a constituency that not only will never support them but is sworn to destroy them.
Their ‘Labour Bad’ messaging is brutal & brilliantly effective…as long as Labour assumes the crouch position in the face of it.
If, instead of cringing, Starmer gave the lot of them a big fat middle finger there would be a double bonus…not only would they, like all bullies, be rendered impotent but also what a spring it would put in the step of all us loyal Labour voters so bitterly disappointed by the timidity & clumsiness of this government.
This is so powerful Peter. A couple of thoughts. Firstly, a big reason the five missions didn't stick was that one of them was 'growth'. That is not a mission, it is a driver of the other missions. So the big narrative cannot be growth or cost of living. Secondly, it has to be something the govt can control (agree with your milestones as options) + it needs to play strongly to 'Labour values (the liberal-left bloc), not pander to Reform/Tory (hence I would not prioritise asylum hotels).
with respect, there’s bound to be anxiety in a young Government. But is the answer really - chose an issue and shout? Or sack the manager?
To take your football metaphor further.
We, the UK have chosen a new team with a new manager.
They need time to work out practical goals without blowing up the balance of payments even further.
All teams go through periods of change and uncertainty. While they take stock and plan how to win. There aren’t many teams like ManU under Fergusson who can change and maintain their performance.
One given for me is that this Government wants to change the lives of most people in the UK for the better. The have nots. They are redistributing wealth to workers, the young and the old. Investing in our security. But that, as I’m sure you are aware takes time.
You’re right, this team aren’t over promoted jumped up public school types.
Unlike Reform, they don’t swagger and strut as you suggest. Often displaying misplaced self confidence which can cost us dearly.
Is that what we really want? Or deserve - Again?
I certainly don’t.
The PM is targeting Reform; the Farage Boats and Tory Hotels.
This appears to have stemmed their popularity despite the huge social media campaigns targeted at our PM. Possibly funded by Crypto Barrons or, even worse Russia.
That said, the international goal posts keep changing. That aberration in the White House is a nightmare for us all (apart from Chi and Putin, who must be licking their lips)
His latest outrage in Venezuela demands a considered and strong response. Our PM has demonstrated that he can be hard - in the National interest.
We need to be careful what we wish for. Trust him and he, like Arteta will deliver.
Peter, thanks for your Interesting keyboard perspective.
My first thought is that The PM and his teams are working hard on the issues your refer to e.g. Poverty and Tory austerity, workers rights and pay, Farage boats and Tory hotels. Security at home and abroad.
But - change takes time.
He has focused his attack on Reform since the October Conference. Their vote has stalled and the Tories improved. on domestic issues and expose reform, as you suggest.
But, let’s face it Trump has (yet again) thrown all the balls back in the air.
You're may be right. But this new, inexperienced gvt has had unprecedented negative press from day one, and many new, young, inexperienced MPs who are easily undermined However large the majority, few gvts hit the ground running as "great" governments.
Very important point about mission-driven government. The recent article by Starmer’s former director of strategy reveals (inadvertently) that the abandonment of mission-driven government was not replaced with any coherent vision of state reform.
I am inclined to believe that Starmer will never change. He has the touch of Gordon Brown about him, excluding the sneer that “are you not aware that I am twice as clever as you are?”. He withdrew the whip from five MPs who voted to remove the two child limit, a policy that was always wrong, irrespective of the government’s capacity to meet the cost. It is alleged that he failed to consult his chief whip on the reduction of PIP payments that caused his defeat in the commons. All the confidence in the world cannot defeat bad judgment.
Many of the proposals are self evident so why have we never heard Starmer propose anything that relates to anything solid. We all want growth, more apprenticeships, to reduce the nine million of working age people on benefits, to build 1.5 million houses, and motherhood and apple pie. I suggest we find the people who can do this and sack the people who cannot.
If you are Keir Starmer’s strategist, as you say, you’ve failed catastrophically! There is no visible strategy; only knee-jerks-as-tactics. Starmer (and the personality vacuums he’s installed around him) just hasn’t got it in him. It’s all very well him saying “I don’t have a political ideology”, but ideology is what makes politicians. No ideology = no strategy. If you don’t have something you believe in and are prepared to fight for, you’re wasting our time. Starmer has no fire in his belly. And no fire in your belly makes you a perfect civil servant, not any sort of leader.
Sorry, but it’s over. No one who has lost the country because they are visibly weak can ever regain it. Trust takes time to build, but is lost in an instant.
I agree. The problem you’re describing isn’t just one of
strategy or communications, but of anxiety contagion - i.e., where anxiety spreads through the system and shows up as rigidity, micro-management and scripted politics.
The real task of leadership in these moments isn’t swagger or noise, but the capacity to hold the pressure from the wider system - to tolerate criticism, disagreement and risk, while still thinking,
communicating and acting with clear, deeply felt purpose.
Confidence grows out of direction and delivery, not performance.
Populists thrive in the spaces where authority looks anxious or evasive. A government that sets its own terms, makes arguments it believes in, and shows it can get things done would rapidly shrink that space.
Another great post. I think a great deal of this should apply to any large organisation. Scripted corporate comms obviously has a very important part to play, but every large organisation needs to come across as dynamic and confident. And i think that means letting leaders express themselves in an unscripted manner (scripts can be the biggest barrier to sincere expression). And we need our leaders to be loud. Often the nuance is far less important than "insiders" on a narrative like to think. Be bold. The algorithms dictate that the opposing view is less likely to register anyway.
You are right Peter. If this government fails, and that's what it's doing just now, for the reasons you set out, a great national tragedy awaits us. In my view, the PM is the key. He needs a much better team around him - people who themselves could almost be PM but who, recognising the national emergency, want Keir to succeed. The job of PM is, anyway, too big for one person these days - even without some of Keir Starmer's clear deficiencies.
Digital ID a good idea? No thanks. Blairite authoritarianism again. Anyway you can write what you like, Starmer hasn’t got it in him. He’s not a leader. You know what this post reeks of? Frustration and desperation.
Great piece. What has continued to shock me is how often the Government has ended up on the back foot following its own policy announcements. Digital ID is a good example. A good policy decision but shockingly communicated and now seemingly forgotten by the Government. They're struggling to get a grip and set the agenda.
You are essentially speaking the “blindingly obvious” for those of us who contemplate politics.
Your call for change. As Kier said to me in a casual private conversation in 2018 re appearing on Andrew Marr the next day, he said “I can’t change my personality, people need to take me as I am”. It is very evident from his performance on Laura yesterday he remains true to form.
But Kier isn’t the problem. The antiquated democratic system we operate is the principal concern. This was well articulated by Dominic Cummings in his recent interview by the Spectator. What he or indeed most of the political pundits do not appreciate is that it is now possible to rebuild our dilapidated democracy.
You sadly provide little feedback to the well considered posts that are submitted - contra Dec 29th posting(!) Thats what I thought Substacks were all about.
A big part of ‘swagger’ would be to give a great big metaphorical F.U. to the Mail & the rest of the Tory rags.
Just as with Reform, Starmer’s government wastes unconscionable amounts of time & energy trying to please a constituency that not only will never support them but is sworn to destroy them.
Their ‘Labour Bad’ messaging is brutal & brilliantly effective…as long as Labour assumes the crouch position in the face of it.
If, instead of cringing, Starmer gave the lot of them a big fat middle finger there would be a double bonus…not only would they, like all bullies, be rendered impotent but also what a spring it would put in the step of all us loyal Labour voters so bitterly disappointed by the timidity & clumsiness of this government.
Driver Andy
This is so powerful Peter. A couple of thoughts. Firstly, a big reason the five missions didn't stick was that one of them was 'growth'. That is not a mission, it is a driver of the other missions. So the big narrative cannot be growth or cost of living. Secondly, it has to be something the govt can control (agree with your milestones as options) + it needs to play strongly to 'Labour values (the liberal-left bloc), not pander to Reform/Tory (hence I would not prioritise asylum hotels).
Peter,
with respect, there’s bound to be anxiety in a young Government. But is the answer really - chose an issue and shout? Or sack the manager?
To take your football metaphor further.
We, the UK have chosen a new team with a new manager.
They need time to work out practical goals without blowing up the balance of payments even further.
All teams go through periods of change and uncertainty. While they take stock and plan how to win. There aren’t many teams like ManU under Fergusson who can change and maintain their performance.
One given for me is that this Government wants to change the lives of most people in the UK for the better. The have nots. They are redistributing wealth to workers, the young and the old. Investing in our security. But that, as I’m sure you are aware takes time.
You’re right, this team aren’t over promoted jumped up public school types.
Unlike Reform, they don’t swagger and strut as you suggest. Often displaying misplaced self confidence which can cost us dearly.
Is that what we really want? Or deserve - Again?
I certainly don’t.
The PM is targeting Reform; the Farage Boats and Tory Hotels.
This appears to have stemmed their popularity despite the huge social media campaigns targeted at our PM. Possibly funded by Crypto Barrons or, even worse Russia.
That said, the international goal posts keep changing. That aberration in the White House is a nightmare for us all (apart from Chi and Putin, who must be licking their lips)
His latest outrage in Venezuela demands a considered and strong response. Our PM has demonstrated that he can be hard - in the National interest.
We need to be careful what we wish for. Trust him and he, like Arteta will deliver.
Peter, thanks for your Interesting keyboard perspective.
My first thought is that The PM and his teams are working hard on the issues your refer to e.g. Poverty and Tory austerity, workers rights and pay, Farage boats and Tory hotels. Security at home and abroad.
But - change takes time.
He has focused his attack on Reform since the October Conference. Their vote has stalled and the Tories improved. on domestic issues and expose reform, as you suggest.
But, let’s face it Trump has (yet again) thrown all the balls back in the air.
You're may be right. But this new, inexperienced gvt has had unprecedented negative press from day one, and many new, young, inexperienced MPs who are easily undermined However large the majority, few gvts hit the ground running as "great" governments.
Very important point about mission-driven government. The recent article by Starmer’s former director of strategy reveals (inadvertently) that the abandonment of mission-driven government was not replaced with any coherent vision of state reform.
I am inclined to believe that Starmer will never change. He has the touch of Gordon Brown about him, excluding the sneer that “are you not aware that I am twice as clever as you are?”. He withdrew the whip from five MPs who voted to remove the two child limit, a policy that was always wrong, irrespective of the government’s capacity to meet the cost. It is alleged that he failed to consult his chief whip on the reduction of PIP payments that caused his defeat in the commons. All the confidence in the world cannot defeat bad judgment.
Many of the proposals are self evident so why have we never heard Starmer propose anything that relates to anything solid. We all want growth, more apprenticeships, to reduce the nine million of working age people on benefits, to build 1.5 million houses, and motherhood and apple pie. I suggest we find the people who can do this and sack the people who cannot.
If you are Keir Starmer’s strategist, as you say, you’ve failed catastrophically! There is no visible strategy; only knee-jerks-as-tactics. Starmer (and the personality vacuums he’s installed around him) just hasn’t got it in him. It’s all very well him saying “I don’t have a political ideology”, but ideology is what makes politicians. No ideology = no strategy. If you don’t have something you believe in and are prepared to fight for, you’re wasting our time. Starmer has no fire in his belly. And no fire in your belly makes you a perfect civil servant, not any sort of leader.
Sorry, but it’s over. No one who has lost the country because they are visibly weak can ever regain it. Trust takes time to build, but is lost in an instant.
I agree. The problem you’re describing isn’t just one of
strategy or communications, but of anxiety contagion - i.e., where anxiety spreads through the system and shows up as rigidity, micro-management and scripted politics.
The real task of leadership in these moments isn’t swagger or noise, but the capacity to hold the pressure from the wider system - to tolerate criticism, disagreement and risk, while still thinking,
communicating and acting with clear, deeply felt purpose.
Confidence grows out of direction and delivery, not performance.
Populists thrive in the spaces where authority looks anxious or evasive. A government that sets its own terms, makes arguments it believes in, and shows it can get things done would rapidly shrink that space.
I totally agree with this.
Another great post. I think a great deal of this should apply to any large organisation. Scripted corporate comms obviously has a very important part to play, but every large organisation needs to come across as dynamic and confident. And i think that means letting leaders express themselves in an unscripted manner (scripts can be the biggest barrier to sincere expression). And we need our leaders to be loud. Often the nuance is far less important than "insiders" on a narrative like to think. Be bold. The algorithms dictate that the opposing view is less likely to register anyway.