������Ƶ

This time last year Britain’s Labour Party was celebrating one of the most memorable general election victories, a win that swept new Prime Minister Keir Starmer into 10 Downing Street with a decisive working majority of 172 seats. Admittedly, it was as much the unpopularity of the Conservative Party — after 14 years of austerity, division, and sheer incompetence — as it was the hope that Labour would usher in a new dawn for British politics and society that contributed to Labour’s stunning success.

Starmer and his government should have assumed power with a spring in their step, with confidence, and an inner belief befitting a party that had just received a mandate from the British people for a radical change of direction. Instead, the approach has been one of trepidation, risk aversion, and more focusing on the difficult legacy left by the previous government in order to justify a lack of any overarching vision or plan to achieve it. There is much truth in the claim that the Conservatives left the UK in a sorry state, but this does not exonerate the current government and its leader from a slow, stuttering, and uninspiring first year.

A year on, it has become apparent that there are no quick fixes for the ills of Britain’s economy and society, and that this is a government that is more comfortable with incremental change and continuity — when, in fact, there has been a need for some far-reaching changes to instill hope, a sense that a departure from the past is possible, and that “we are all in it together.” There have been flickers of all that, but in a most disjointed manner, and Starmer has shown more leadership on the international stage than on the domestic one.

Symbolically, on the week of its first anniversary, the government whips had to contain a rebellion by dozens of backbenchers and others in the party who opposed planned benefit cuts, and only some significant last-minute concessions saved it from losing a vote in the House of Commons. There are mitigating circumstances for the government’s inability to set a reformist social-democratic agenda, among them an extremely costly Brexit; the Conservatives’ neglect of public services, their general listless approach to social equality, opportunities for all and social justice in general; and even the necessity to divert resources to defense as a result of the immediate need to support Ukraine in its war with Russia. Nevertheless, a year into this government, British people do not see or feel that enough has improved on the issues that really matter to them, from reviving the National Health Service to progress on economic growth, education, infrastructure, and affordable housing.

To be sure, we should cut Labour some slack. The public coffers were, indeed, rather empty when they came to power, and finding a balance between raising funds, mainly through taxation, while not sending the economy into stagnation is never easy. The UK economy is suffering from decades of structural vulnerabilities, and while there are pockets of economic buoyancy, at the same time there is also weak productivity, low business investment, persistent long-term unemployment, a constant decline in manufacturing, growing social inequalities, and a lack of competition in the utilities market. A year on, there is little evidence that these issues have been dealt with convincingly since Labour returned to power.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has shown more leadership on the international stage than on the domestic one.

Yossi Mekelberg

At the same time there is hardly any reason for doom and gloom, and unlike many previous administrations, Labour under Starmer is responsive when things go wrong. This may be down to either a genuine attentiveness to concerns raised by the public or dissenting voices within the party, or sheer pragmatism, but in any case the result is a government that is not averse to changing course, or at least to adjusting when it faces resistance. Frequent U-turns project both weakness and bad policy-making processes, and hence should not become habitual, especially if this compromises core principles or throws the government’s agenda off course.

Yet, there is something refreshing about it as a corrective mechanism. Previous administrations have adhered to policies even when it became obvious to everyone, even themselves, that this was damaging for the party and the country. One could argue that depriving millions of pensioners of winter fuel payments, not agreeing immediately to hold a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs, and most recently cutting benefits for some of those most in need was hardly what you would expect from a Labour government, but the British prime minister deserves some credit for reversing most of those decisions, even if not for political foresight or astuteness.

Moreover, making mistakes early in the electoral cycle, especially with the safety net of a huge majority, enables not only a learning from mistakes, but also the opportunity for a mini-opposition to emerge within the ruling party to serve as the government’s conscience and compass, as long as it is aimed at keeping the party in touch with its roots and support base. While Starmer is hardly seen as an inspirational leader at home, his record on the world stage is mixed. On Ukraine and on the need to rebuild the UK and European military capabilities to stop the Russian threat, he has been bold and determined to lead from the front. On the issue of a ceasefire in Gaza and recognizing Palestinian statehood, he has been too slow to recognize that giving Israel a blank cheque will only end in further disaster, and he always has one eye on what Washington says. He is still more respected abroad than at home.

There is no escape from the fact that voters are already disillusioned with the Labour government, as they express it time and again in opinion polls. With the Conservatives incapable of picking themselves from the canvas after last year’s election knockout, the big winner is the populist-nationalist party Reform, which in its opportunism is devoid of any constructive policies, only specializing in exploiting societal malaise, and people’s resentments and fears. It is for Starmer to start his second year in power by diving deeper to address the fundamental sources of disquiet in British society and to resurrect the welfare society by enabling hard working people to have a decent life and for young people to see the prospect of enjoying the kind of life that the post-war generations enjoyed. This will require more than just tweaking with the current state of affairs.

• Yossi Mekelberg is a professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg