The Party That Came to Power With a Plan and Stayed With a Policy Review by Lawson Akhigbe

I. The Starmer Paradox: Elected on Change, Governing on Caution

There is a peculiar art to promising transformation and then delivering institutional inertia with a fresh coat of paint. Keir Starmer has, so far, mastered this art with remarkable consistency.

Labour won an electoral landslide in 2024, but the strategy that got them into power has proven considerably less effective at keeping them there. The essential problem is that “being not the Tories” is an electoral programme, not a governing one, and the distinction has become painfully visible.

II. The Catalogue of Reversals: A Guided Tour

By early 2026, the government had accumulated what can only be described as an impressive portfolio of policy U-turns, at least thirteen major ones by last count, across nearly every domain:

Welfare Reform: Perhaps the most consequential. In March 2025, Labour unveiled plans for sweeping changes to the benefits system, promising to save £5 billion a year by 2030 by making it harder for those with “less severe conditions” to claim disability benefits, and nearly halving successful new claims. What followed was the biggest rebellion of Starmer’s premiership. More than 100 Labour MPs signed a “reasoned amendment” in opposition, arguing the cuts were “too harsh” and would “penalise the most vulnerable.” The government made a dramatic retreat, hollowing out the bill’s central provisions. Under threat of rebellion, the Government u-turned on its welfare reform plans, but the rising cost of the welfare bill, and the political cost of that reversal, remain unresolved.

Winter Fuel Allowance: The government reversed its July 2024 announcement that had been intended to save £3 billion, instead expanding eligibility to pensioners with an income of £35,000 or less. A majority of Labour members supported this reversal, but that’s cold comfort when the original cut generated months of toxic headlines about pensioners freezing.

Farmers and Inheritance Tax: Labour announced it would raise the inheritance tax relief threshold for farmers after backlash from rural communities, significantly reducing the number of farms facing higher bills. The spectacle of tractor convoys descending on Westminster concentrated ministerial minds considerably.

Unfair Dismissal Rights: A flagship workers’ rights pledge, watered down in negotiation. The Government abandoned the proposal to cut the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims from 24 months to the first day in a new job, instead of settling on six months.

The Grooming Gangs Inquiry: The government “repeatedly insisted” there was no need for a national inquiry, launching five “locally-led” investigations instead, before eventually launching a national inquiry after resisting calls for months.

Digital ID Cards: The government dropped plans to require workers to sign up for its digital ID card scheme, with concerns it “could undermine public trust and lead to a cabinet revolt.”

Local Elections: Labour backtracked on plans to postpone local elections for 30 councils in May 2026, stating that “following legal advice,” all elections would proceed as originally planned. “Following legal advice” — a phrase that, by now, has acquired the quality of a confession.

III. The Ideological Drift: Change Within the Framework

Beyond the U-turns lies a more structural question: is this ideological flexibility or ideological vacancy?

Academic analysis suggests that Labour’s 2024–2025 approach reflects change operating within a long-standing framework shaped by earlier Coalition, Conservative, and New Labour governments, with the “Pathways to Work” initiative combining activation with targeted employment support while retaining features of the conditional welfare model. The name is new. The architecture, inherited.

The 2025 Budget was characterised as a classic “tax and spend” Labour budget, though Labour’s supposedly flagship policy of “growth” was conspicuously absent from the Budget’s announcements. The party elected on a growth mandate appears to have mislaid growth somewhere between the spending review and the press conference.

IV. The Political Fallout: A Fragmenting Coalition

Labour’s heartlands have lost trust in traditional politicians and are turning to the untested Reform UK, while London and the country’s youth are increasingly favouring more left-leaning parties such as the Greens. With Labour’s drop in the polls, the left vote is fragmenting.

An internal Survation poll found that 65% of Labour members believe the government has reversed course on too When two-thirds of your own members think you’ve U-turned too much, you have a messaging problem that no rebranding exercise will solve.

V. The Satirical Verdict

The Starmer government has, in under two years, managed to alienate farmers, the disabled, pensioners, civil libertarians, trade unions, and its own backbench, while simultaneously being accused of being too cautious by the left and not cautious enough by the right. It is, in a sense, an achievement in symmetrical disappointment.

The government calls it pragmatism. Critics call it rudderlessness. What it most resembles is a party that ran on the manifesto promise of being competent, and is now discovering, live on camera, what competence actually requires.