Keir Starmer: Who is the UK’s new PM and what has he promised?

Britain’s Labour Party leader Keir Starmer delivers a speech during a victory rally at the Tate Modern in London early on July 5, 2024. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 05 July 2024
Follow

Keir Starmer: Who is the UK’s new PM and what has he promised?

  • Starmer faces immediate tests with few resources, slow change could shorten ‘honeymoon period’
  • Former lawyer is known for his cautious approach, on campaign trail, Starmer was keen not to raise high hopes

LONDON: Keir Starmer enters power with one of the longest lists of problems ever to face an incoming prime minister and few resources to deal with them — a situation that could curtail any “honeymoon period” offered by the British people.
It is a situation not lost on the 61-year-old Labour leader and former lawyer, who spent much of the election campaign listening to voters’ concerns about health care, education, and the cost of living, but promising only to try to make the lives of British voters a little better — over time.
“I’m not going to stand here and say there’s some magic wand that I can wave the day after the election and find money that isn’t there,” he said in a head-to-head debate with his predecessor Rishi Sunak before the election. “Huge damage has been done to our economy. It is going to take time.”
It is not an easy sell.
Despite being on course for a massive majority in the parliamentary election, many voters are disenchanted with politicians after years of what became an increasingly chaotic and scandal-ridden Conservative government and what was an often divided Labour opposition, dogged antisemitism accusations.
Hailing his party’s victory at a speech to supporters, Starmer said on Friday: “We did it. Change begins now, and it feels good. I have to be honest.”
“Today, we start the next chapter, begin the work of change, the mission of national renewal and start to rebuild our country.”
Starmer says he leads a changed Labour Party, having instilled a sense of discipline after it all but tore itself apart during the Brexit years under his predecessor, veteran left-winger Jeremy Corbyn.
That message dominated the six-week campaign, with no really new policy offerings beyond those which had been, according to Labour, fully funded and costed. He has tried not to raise hopes for swift change too high, putting wealth creation and political and economic stability at the heart of his pitch to voters.
CAUTIOUS AND METHODICAL
The strategy is very much a product of Starmer, who turned to politics in his 50s in a career that has been marked by a cautious and methodical approach, relying on competence and pragmatism rather than being driven by an overriding ideology.
Named after the founder of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie, Starmer was brought up in a left-wing household. As a barrister, he often defended underdogs and worked to get people off death row around the world.
He became a Labour lawmaker in 2015, a year after he received a knighthood for his services to law and criminal justice and was appointed Labour leader in 2020 following the party’s worst election showing since 1935.
He implemented a plan to turn the party around and guide its priorities, with one person who worked with Starmer saying: “He thinks about the best way to take people with him.”
This approach has led to the charge that he is dull. He has drawn negative comparisons with Tony Blair, who led the party to victory with a landslide majority in 1997.
“I think he’s got a good heart but he’s got no charisma. And people do buy charisma. That’s how Tony Blair got in,” said Valerie Palmer, 80, a voter in the seaside town of Clacton-on-Sea.
NOT IN LOVE WITH LABOUR
Unwilling to make promises that could not be costed, his approach has also prompted critics to say the party’s manifesto offered only a partial view of what Labour would do in government — something the Conservatives tried to capitalize on by saying Starmer would raise taxes.
Starmer denied this, saying he would not raise income tax rates, employees’ national insurance contributions, value-added tax or corporation tax.
Some businesses say they look forward to a period of calm after 14 years of turbulent Conservative government, marked by Britain’s vote to leave the European Union in 2016 and the cost of living crisis that followed the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
One FTSE-100 CEO told Reuters they had met Labour’s top team several times and the party had made a strong “pitch” to business.
Laura Foll, portfolio manager at Janus Henderson Investors, said it looked like Britain was returning to an era when “boring is good.”
But for voters, real-life difficulties are more of a pressing concern, with people crying out for Labour to tackle the ailing health service, widen educational opportunities and improve living standards.
For some, although they wanted the Conservatives out of power, they had not fallen in love with Labour, or with Starmer.
“I’m excited about change, but I don’t really love the Labour Party,” said Ellie O’Connell, 28, at the Glastonbury music festival.
Sitting in the courtyard of a doctors’ surgery, Starmer sipped tea with patients before the election, listening to them complain about how difficult it was to get an appointment.
His offer of helping train more doctors, reducing bureaucracy and getting better control over budgets missed out one thing that might help — more money, something his new government will not have much of.
Asked by Reuters how he would better retain doctors who say their salaries are uncompetitive internationally, he said: “I don’t have a wand that I can wave to fix all the problems when it comes to salaries overnight if we win the election.”
With only 9 billion pounds ($11 billion) of so-called fiscal headroom — barely a third of the average for governments since 2010 — Starmer might have to keep pressing the message that change will take time.
That may cut short any political honeymoon — the respite voters and newspapers offer incoming administrations from criticism.
This cautious approach has also alienated some on the left of the party. Asked how he thought Starmer would be as prime minister, James Schneider, former director of communications for Corbyn, said: “When push comes to shove, he will be on the side of bosses over workers.”


Proposals on immigration enforcement flood into state legislatures, heightened by Minnesota action

Updated 11 sec ago
Follow

Proposals on immigration enforcement flood into state legislatures, heightened by Minnesota action

  • Oregon Democrats plan to introduce a bill to allow residents to sue federal officers for violating their Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure

NASHVILLE, Tennessee: As Democrats across the country propose state law changes to restrict federal immigration officers after the shooting death of a protester in Minneapolis, Tennessee Republicans introduced a package of bills Thursday backed by the White House that would enlist the full force of the state to support President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.
Momentum in Democratic-led states for the measures, some of them proposed for years, is growing as legislatures return to work following the killing of Renee Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer. But Republicans are pushing back, blaming protesters for impeding the enforcement of immigration laws.

Democratic bills seek to limit ICE

Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul wants New York to allow people to sue federal officers alleging violations of their constitutional rights. Another measure aims to keep immigration officers lacking judicial warrants out of schools, hospitals and houses of worship.
Oregon Democrats plan to introduce a bill to allow residents to sue federal officers for violating their Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure.
New Jersey’s Democrat-led Legislature passed three bills Monday that immigrant rights groups have long pushed for, including a measure prohibiting state law enforcement officers from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy has until his last day in office Tuesday to sign or veto them.
California lawmakers are proposing to ban local and state law enforcement from taking second jobs with the Department of Homeland Security and make it a violation of state law when ICE officers make “indiscriminate” arrests around court appearances. Other measures are pending.
“Where you have government actions with no accountability, that is not true democracy,” Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco said at a news conference.
Democrats also push bills in red states
Democrats in Georgia introduced four Senate bills designed to limit immigration enforcement — a package unlikely to become law because Georgia’s conservative upper chamber is led by Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, a close Trump ally. Democrats said it is still important to take a stand.
“Donald Trump has unleashed brutal aggression on our families and our communities across our country,” said state Sen. Sheikh Rahman, an immigrant from Bangladesh whose district in suburban Atlanta’s Gwinnett County is home to many immigrants.
Democrats in New Hampshire have proposed numerous measures seeking to limit federal immigration enforcement, but the state’s Republican majorities passed a new law taking effect this month that bans “sanctuary cities.”
Tennessee GOP works with White House on a response
The bills Tennessee Republicans are introducing appear to require government agencies to check the legal status of all residents before they can obtain public benefits; secure licenses for teaching, nursing and other professions; and get driver’s licenses or register their cars.
They also would include verifying K-12 students’ legal status, which appears to conflict with a US Supreme Court precedent. And they propose criminalizing illegal entry as a misdemeanor, a measure similar to several other states’ requirements, some of which are blocked in court.
“We’re going to do what we can to make sure that if you’re here illegally, we will have the data, we’ll have the transparency, and we’re not spending taxpayer dollars on you unless you’re in jail,” House Speaker Cameron Sexton said at a news conference Thursday.
Trump administration sues to stop laws
The Trump administration has opposed any effort to blunt ICE, including suing local governments whose “sanctuary” policies limit police interactions with federal officers.
States have broad power to regulate within their borders unless the US Constitution bars it, but many of these laws raise novel issues that courts will have to sort out, said Harrison Stark, senior counsel with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School.
“There’s not a super clear, concrete legal answer to a lot of these questions,” he said. “It’s almost guaranteed there will be federal litigation over a lot of these policies.”
That is already happening.
California in September was the first to ban most law enforcement officers, including federal immigration officers, from covering their faces on duty. The Justice Department said its officers won’t comply and sued California, arguing that the laws threaten the safety of officers who are facing “unprecedented” harassment, doxing and violence.
The Justice Department also sued Illinois last month, challenging a law that bars federal civil arrests near courthouses, protects medical records and regulates how universities and day care centers manage information about immigration status. The Justice Department claims the law is unconstitutional and threatens federal officers’ safety.
Targeted states push back
Minnesota and Illinois, joined by their largest cities, sued the Trump administration this week. Minneapolis and Minnesota accuse the Republican administration of violating free speech rights by punishing a progressive state that favors Democrats and welcomes immigrants. Illinois and Chicago claim “Operation Midway Blitz” made residents afraid to leave their homes.
Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin accused Minnesota officials of ignoring public safety and called the Illinois lawsuit “baseless.”