This piece looks at the Starmer years and starts by comparing the inherited legacy in 2024 with that of 2010. It moves on to assessing the performance of the Labour Government and discusses why Starmer had become so unpopular that he has felt it best to resign. There is a discussion of the State of the Nation in terms of the economy, media, dark money in politics, xenophobia and immigration, Climate Change denialism, electoral reform and Brexit. Finally, conclusions are drawn.
The 2010 transition and broken Britain
Broken Britain was a term that David Cameron used to describe a perceived widespread state of social decay in the run-up to the 2010 GE. In retrospect, these were halcyon days; for example, satisfaction with the NHS was never higher, but of course, the GFC hit the UK very hard and triggered the worst recession since WWII. The national debt-to-GDP ratio was about 65%, and borrowing costs were near zero; the Bank of England base rate was only 0.1%.
The Conservatives fell short of an outright win in the 2010 general election, with 306 seats, but the key development was the rise of the Orange Book Lib Dems. The Orange Book was published in 2004. One of its editors was Paul Marshall, now of Unheard and GB News. Ideas about liberation through the small state, which would have been unthinkable when Charles Kennedy was leader, moved into the mainstream. This created space for a Conservative coalition and an extreme Thatcherite state-shrinking agenda: Austerity.
Austerity was, of course, voodoo economics and is estimated to have cost the average household £4,000 by 2015. For those surviving on welfare, the cuts were vicious, resulting in over 330,000 excess deaths.
The Conservatives also have an undeserved reputation for being good for the economy (the exact opposite is true), and they somehow made it plausible that Labour caused the GFC. Prof Simon Wren-Lewis calls this their ability to gaslight much of the public, Media Macro, and explores it often in his excellent blog and in his book The Lies We Were Told.
The Alternative Vote (AV) Referendum was the most significant Lib Dem win. Still, the broader picture is that the Conservatives played them, and the coalition was a disaster for the Lib Dems (dropping from 57 to eight seats in the following GE) and for the country in general.
The AV result was a hammer blow. On a turnout of 42.2%: 68% ‘No’ and 32% ‘Yes’. Only 10 of 440 local voting areas were 50%+: Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh Central, Glasgow Kelvin, and six in London. The deeply dishonest No to AV campaign was led by Matthew Elliott, who later became CEO of Vote Leave in the Brexit campaign. As barefaced dishonesty had worked so effectively and without any penalties, it was unsurprising similar tactics were used in the Brexit Referendum.
There is not time to detail the wreckage the 14 years of Tory rule had done to the country. But two catastrophic errors were the Austerity Agenda and Brexit. Broken Britain has become a reality, as John Harris wrote in the Guardian. The years since 2010 had been disastrous economically, with near-zero growth, stagnating productivity, take-home pay and GDP per capita. What marginal gains there have been in terms of GDP have gone to the super-rich (top 1%).
Even worse was the cultural legacy, with a rise of tribalism, xenophobia, islamophobia, antisemitism, polarisation, divisiveness, wedge issues, and the curious “woke” agenda, which seems to be anything the far-right dislikes.
The 2024 transition and banjaxed Britain
The 2024 legacy was vastly worse than 2010. Broken is an insufficiently strong term. Banjaxed is a better word – broken beyond repair. Nothing seemed to work. RAAC in schools, record NHS waiting lists, the worst NHS staffing crisis in history, railway chaos, universities in crisis, cost-of-living crisis, housing crisis, record use of food banks, polluted rivers and coasts, the highest tax burden since the end of WWII. The list goes on and on. GDP per capita, productivity and take-home pay had flatlined since 2010. There was no coherent economic strategy. The national debt-to-GDP ratio was about 100%, and HMG borrowing costs were much higher, approaching 5%.
There were ongoing wars in Ukraine and Israel/Gaza, and the long-term effects of Covid, both economically and psychologically, and with Long-Covid, a less healthy nation.
The OBR forecast was grim, and the Bank of England predicted low growth, high inflation and interest rates remaining high for some time.
Brexit was proving to be as much of an economic disaster as 98% of economists predicted. The positive impact of the ‘world-class’ trade deals, such as the flagship CPTPP, had been downgraded from a miserly 0.08% of GDP to 0.04% in the long term. The adverse effects of leaving the EU, particularly the single market, continue to mount and, at 6-8% of GDP so far, dwarf the benefits of the other trade agreements. Best for Britain has a useful tracker here. Losses to the average worker are now estimated at £10,700 per year in a December 2023 Resolution Foundation report: Ending Stagnation.
Banjaxed can also mean utterly exhausted, and Britain seemed banjaxed in this way too. There was longing for rest and recovery. It was as if the country was suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Brexit experiment had been a disaster, not only economically but also culturally. Resentment of foreigners, in particular asylum seekers and Muslims, was approaching boiling point and indeed boiled over a few weeks after the GE.
The 2024 Labour Government
After eight years of post-Brexit chaos, I craved quiet competence – a return to boring politics so we could finally get on with our lives. I wanted Starmer and his team to get to work behind the scenes. Starmer lacked oratorical flair, a surprise for a seasoned barrister. He had little charisma, but after Johnson, that might not be a bad thing. Clem Atlee was steady but unremarkable. I hoped for a honeymoon period, like Blair in ’97.
The economic situation was vastly worse than in 2010, but major controversy erupted about a £22 billion black hole in the budget. It was clear there would be no honeymoon period. Indeed, the right-wing press attacked Starmer and Reeves with what seemed unprecedented viciousness. Very different to 2010 when the media and public seemed to buy the ludicrous lie that Labour overspending had caused the GFC.
There were political mistakes such as an overly pessimistic tone, U-turns on the Winter Fuel Allowance, inheritance tax on farms over 1M, and Welfare Cuts. Starmer and his team lacked political antennae. Comms seemed to be dreadful. Labour had achieved a lot in two years, but they got very little credit.
People seemed fed up with normal politics and Reform UK rapidly became the most popular party in the opinion polls. The Green Party under Zac Polanski, with a brand of Left-Wing Populism, also surged in the polls. The Labour government was becoming deeply unpopular, and Starmer himself seemed hated by a large fraction of the British electorate. I found that baffling, but as Secor and Anderson argue in their book Politics of Feeling and in a summary in NE Bylines, feelings and tribal identity have become vastly more important than facts, and hatred offers the illusion of reassurance. It strengthens tribal identity and establishes an unequivocal position against something.
Labour’s biggest mistake was pandering to “Red Wall” and Reform voters and ignoring their progressive base. From a progressive perspective, four things were most disappointing.
Firstly, rather than countering racism, xenophobia, and hatred of immigrants, it bought into the narrative. History shows that pandering to right-wing racists only encourages them to go even further and move the Overton Window even further to the right. Distressingly, Shabana Mahmood as Home Secretary continued the performative cruelty started by the Tories, and I agreed with Alf Dubs that she should be removed and her draconian plans scrapped.
Secondly, the lack of ambition to reverse Brexit or form deeper links with the EU by joining the Customs Union and, better still, the Single Market was disappointing. The belligerence was gone, but Cakeism remained. There was no real ambition or urgency, which made the lack of ambition all the more disappointing. To be fair, they have reached agreement on ERASMUS+.
Thirdly, whereas Israel has an absolute right to defend itself, its response to the horrific 7 October massacre was disproportionate, and whereas the Americans were the only people with real power, Starmer was lenient on what I consider to be blatant, industrial-scale Israeli war crimes and genocide. Just as it is possible to love America and Americans and utterly condemn Trump and his government, it is possible to love Jews and Israel and utterly condemn the Netanyahu government.
Fourthly. Starmer seemed to suck up to Donal Trump. Apart from being cringeworthy, this led to the disastrous appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador and the subsequent fallout. The sacking of Ollie Robbins as a scapegoat seemed selfish and small-minded (Robbins is appealing the decision). Since the US/Israeli war on Iran, he has been much stronger.
The dislike of Starmer has become so entrenched that he resigned as PM, and Andy Burnham has taken over. Burnham has far better political and oratorical skills and, in general, is liked, but will likely face the same vitriol from the right-wing press as Starmer. I naturally wish Burnham every success.
The State of the Nation
Economy
There are major economic issues, but the big economic picture is that real household disposable income has essentially flatlined since 2008. If the 1948-2008 trend had continued into the current financial year, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimates it would have been £38,604 rather than the actual £26,511. Another important figure is GDP, critical to the government’s ability to spend and improve services; it has also grown anaemic since 2008. GDP per capita has hardly improved at all.
According to the Equality Trust, the UK has very high income inequality compared to other developed countries; it ranks 9th most unequal among 38 OECD countries, and inequality is getting worse. The UK’s wealth gap has grown by 50% in eight years. Inequality in particular is fuelling resentment. There is a lack of trust in the major parties after 18 years of stagnation. It is understandable that people want change and are susceptible to the snake oil of Reform.
Media
Print Media
Print media has always had a right-wing bias. In 2024, the Press Gazette estimated the combined daily circulation of the right-wing press, Mail, Sun, Express, Telegraph, Standard and Times was 2.1M as opposed to the left-wing Mirror and Guardian at 0.3M. The Press Gazette considers the FT, I, Metro, and Star to be politically neutral. As mentioned previously, the Telegraph has descended from a paper of record to a rabid tabloid with increasingly deranged click-bait headlines.
The Telegraph may be the worst offender, but as online presence becomes increasingly dominant relative to printed editions, click-baiting and rage-baiting is more financially lucrative than good old-fashioned fact-based journalism. There is a race to the gutter.
Overall circulation is down to around a third of what it was in 2000, so their influence should be declining. However, they often set the news agenda and remain extremely important. Starmer’s downfall was accelerated by press vitriol. Angela Raynor seemed to be particularly hated and hounded out of office over a genuine mistake. Rather than factual reporting, there seems to be bloodlust for yet another scalp.
Broadcast Media
The BBC environment is becoming increasingly dominated by the far-right, with a revolving door between the Tories, 55 Tufton Street and the BBC. Tufton Street stooges appear constantly on the BBC, e.g. on Question Time, with no explanation of their origin, funding, or agenda. Recent Political editors such as Laura Kuenssberg and Chris Mason seem more interested in court politics than in-depth analysis. I long for the days of John Cole and Andrew Marr.
The BBC should keep voters informed, but is clearly failing, as Chris Dillow says in his 35% strategy. Nearly half of voters wrongly think immigration is rising, though it’s actually falling rapidly. Over 20% mistakenly believe overseas aid, asylum seekers, or MPs’ expenses account for most public spending, but these are tiny. Voters also overestimate benefit spending and fraud: they think 36.9% of welfare goes to unemployment (actual: less than 5%) and guess benefits fraud at 28.1% (actual: under 3%).
To add to the already right-wing bias, new stations such as GB News have arrived; apparently not a news station at all, it is not subject to stringent OFCOM rules on impartiality. There is blatant breaching of OFCOM rules as investigated by the New World, but a recent High Court ruling shows how toothless OFCOM actually is. It seems the BBC also wants to pander to ill-informed Reform voters.
The Internet and Enshitification
Cory Doctorow analysed the degradation of the main internet platforms and coined the term “enshittification” in his book. Misogyny, conspiratorialism, surveillance, manipulation, fraud, and AI slop are drowning the internet. For the monopolists who dominate online – X, TikTok, Amazon, Meta, Apple – this is all part of the playbook. First, the platform lures users with bait, such as free access; then it monetises the activity, bringing in business customers and degrading the user experience; then, once everyone is trapped and competitors are eradicated, it wrings out all the value and transfers it to its executives and shareholders.
Online public squares have become places of torment: the virtual gathering places where we once imagined the world’s problems might be resolved are now a sewer of hatred and abuse; they are thoroughly enshittified. is the prime example of this. Twitter used to be a wonderful resource, but since Musk has taken over, it has become a sewer of far-right propaganda and misinformation.
Xenophobia, demography and immigration
One of the supposed “benefits” of Brexit was that abolishing FoM would reduce net immigration, push up wages, and reduce its salience. The opposite has happened. In the aftermath of Brexit, net migration hit a record 944k in the year to March 2023. Immigrants can be paid 80% of the going rate, which is illegal under EU law, thereby further depressing wages.
Net migration is now falling rapidly; it was 170k in the year to December 2025, and could easily be in negative territory by the end of the year. The right-wing parties seem to be vying with each other to make immigrants as unwelcome and insecure as possible, and Labour seems little better. Both the rules and rhetoric are becoming more and more xenophobic. Does it not occur to them that people could simply stop coming?
Small-boat crossings of the Channel make the most headlines, and the rolling year average from the Migration Observatory peaked at 48k in October 2023 and is now about 36k. These have been used by the far right to radicalise people, stir up division and hatred. Language matters, and calling them illegal immigrants rather than asylum seekers is inaccurate but effective. They are being increasingly used to stir up division, hatred and violence. Asylum hotels have become a flashpoint.
There have always been racists in Britain, but cultural norms had prevented them from openly voicing their opinions. When Enoch Powell delivered his Rivers of Blood speech, it was widely condemned. Powell was fired from his cabinet position by Edward Heath and resigned from the Tory party shortly afterwards, finding a home with the Ulster Unionists and becoming the MP for South Down. Now it seems that racism is tolerated if not encouraged, with the rise of the far right. Language that was once confined to the BNP has now become mainstream.
Fertility rates are dropping worldwide; however, we have hit a turning point in Britain. The replacement rate is about 2.1 children per woman, but the fertility rate currently is 1.41 in England and Wales and even lower in Scotland at 1.25. Indeed, from this year onwards, unless the fertility rate increases, the ONS predicts that deaths will exceed births and that the population will grow only through net migration.
If there is net immigration, which is not guaranteed. The prospect of a declining population is underpriced. In Ireland, there have been periods of mass emigration. Indeed, my father is the only one of four brothers who stayed in Ireland; the other three ended up in Britain, working for the NHS: one as a chest consultant in Yorkshire, one as a GP in Wales, and the other as the stores manager in Tooting Bec, London.
Dark money in politics
Money has always played a role in UK politics, but today political spending is reshaping democracy in ways the public rarely sees. Decisions affecting millions are increasingly shaped not only by elected officials or voters, but by funding networks designed to influence outcomes without leaving fingerprints.
The rise of “dark money” represents one of the most profound shifts in modern governance. It is not simply a matter of large donors spending more. It is the growing ability of individuals, corporations, industries, and interest groups to shape elections and national direction while remaining hidden from the people affected by those choices, and from the democracy those choices sustain.
In terms of Brexit, the DUP Metro wraparound cover on the eve of the Brexit Referendum. It turns out this was part of a £435,000 DUP campaign clearly funded by dark money as investigated by Peter Geoghegan. Geoghegan has tirelessly investigated dark money, and his book Democracy for Sale is essential reading. As is his substack.
Another essential person to follow if interested in this dark web of influence is Carole Cadwalladr.
Farage is very much in the news, having received a £5m ‘gift’ from Reform donor and crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne. There are also questions about financial aid from convicted fraudster ‘Posh’ George Cottrell, received ahead of the 2024 election and never declared.
Climate change and denialism
There is some progress. The Rycroft Review: Countering foreign financial influence and interference in UK politics, which has largely just been implemented: Tough new rules to crack down on foreign money in UK elections.
There is still, however, much work to be done and too many loopholes. In particular, limits on domestic political donations are urgent.
Anthropogenic climate change is not a matter of belief. The scientific evidence is unchallengeable. As I write this in mid-July, the wheat is being harvested outside my door. Even last year, it was not harvested until the end of the month, and it is normally in August or even September. Last year, 2025, was confirmed as the hottest summer since records began in the UK, and this summer may be even hotter, as both May and June set records for the hottest day. Some Conservative leaders have praised following the science, while the current Tory leadership is determined to abolish Net Zero, which I see as a catastrophic mistake.
Drilling in the North Sea makes absolutely no economic sense, and any party that supports it must be doing so only if they have been bought by big oil. Again, I would expect this of Reform, but it is sad to see the Tories, who were once a centre-right, fact-based party, very much in favour of Net Zero, moving to a fantasy-based far-right position. Indeed, Badenock has cemented this shift with Tory candidate selection requiring rejection of Net Zero and the ECHR.
Casino elections and electoral reform
FPTP once made sense, back when politics was a two-horse race between Labour and the Conservatives, who routinely pocketed over 80% of the vote. As recently as 2017, they managed 83%. By 2019, it had slipped to 76%. But now? Their combined share has crashed to just 56% at the last GE and under 40% in the local elections, so FPTP looks hopelessly outdated.
Today’s reality? Five major national parties – Conservative, Green, Labour, Liberal Democrat, and Reform – are all polling around 20%. Add in the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru, and you have a political landscape that FPTP was never designed for, which is why it can no longer deliver fair or sensible results. Elections have become erratic and unpredictable. With five parties in play, someone can win a seat with barely a quarter of the vote. The next general election could easily turn into a lottery rather than a democratic decision.
The country badly needs proportional representation, and, as I have argued in my piece “Towards a Better Voting System,” STV is a clear Winner.
Brexit
Brexit, of course, was a catastrophic mistake and an ill-managed process at every stage of its implementation: from the reason for holding a Referendum at all (part 1) to a fatally flawed design (part 2) to a disastrous Referendum campaign (part 3), chaotic implementation (part 4), and through the abyss, with the natural endpoint being Truss’s disastrous budget and the slow crawl back to reality (part 5).
The geopolitical situation has deteriorated rapidly since 2016. There is a full-blown war in Europe for the first time since WWII in Ukraine. There are credible warnings that Russia could attack NATO within five years. The US under Trump is no longer a reliable ally; indeed, Trump is behaving as if Russia is a greater ally than the EU. Trump hates the EU, as it is one of the two power blocks able to stand up to him. Indeed, Trump wants to destroy the EU — and rebuild it in his image.
The so-called special relationship between the UK and US was always an unequal marriage and has now turned into an abusive one. The US has taken a very dark turn and is heading in the direction of Fascism, though hopefully Trump’s unpopularity will curb his power after the mid-terms. It is more imperative than ever that Britain forge as close a relationship as possible with the EU immediately and get serious about joining as soon as possible.
Best for Britain, for example, has moved to a position that says: “10 years on, EU membership best path forward for UK” as does Roland Smith on his recent On Rejoin piece.
There is no rejoining. Britain will have to stop its slavish adherence to red lines, its cakesism and its exceptionalism and embrace accession under Article 49 of the Copenhagen Criteria. Britain needs to enthusiastically accept Freedom of Movement, Schengen and the Euro.
There is also the hurdle that the UK shows real commitment, ideally through a Referendum with a 60% majority and a simple majority in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. The last thing the EU needs is for the UK to rejoin and a Reform or other far-right government pulling us out again a few years later.
Conclusion
There are a multitude of problems, some easier to solve than others. The most pressing issues are the media environment, the unchecked rise of racism and rabid xenophobia, dark money in politics, climate change and electoral reform.
The Starmer era is over, with Andy Burnham having taken over as PM. As we enter a new era, there is a lot of work to do. I will set out my vision of the way forward and how to rejoin the EU in Part 7, the final part of this mammoth Brexit series.
Friends of Bylines Network
There has never been a greater need for grassroots journalism that investigates the stories that really matter, holds power to account and champions the voices of everyday citizens. We are proudly powered by volunteers but what we do isn’t free.
STAND WITH US for independent, citizen-led journalism that makes democracy stronger, and you will even get some exclusive benefits.
