Keir Starmer's own allies claim 'he's an HR manager, not a leader'

[IwantToRetire]

Extracts of 'Get In', by political journalists Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund, have revealed how the PM's own chief of staff once questioned Sir Keir's ability.

Morgan McSweeney was said to have told a friend early into Sir Keir's time as Labour leader that his boss 'acts like an HR manager, not a leader'.

One of McSweeney's allies was also said to have claimed that 'Keir's not driving the train' in a comment about his leadership of Labour.
In a reference to the diverless Docklands Light Railway in London, they added: 'He thinks he's driving the train, but we've sat him at the front of the DLR.'

Among other revelations in the book, Angela Rayner, Labour's deputy leader, was claimed to have once texted a confidant that she did not know who ran the party.

'It could not be Starmer, she said, because he was incapable of running a bath — never mind the Opposition,' the authors wrote.

DM article published by MSN https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/uknews/keir-starmer-s-own-allies-claim-he-s-an-hr-manager-not-a-leader/ar-AA1yhg3f

Most papers have published bits of the book, or the report of the book, which was published in the Times. https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmers-not-driving-the-train-confessions-of-his-inner-circle-mq2kbg39x - also available in full at https://archive.is/w2sdo

The left was accusing Starmer of shifting towards New Labour, but at the same time even Blair couldn’t make up his mind on exactly what kind of politician Starmer actually was. “I’m in two minds about Keir,” he told a friend in 2021. “The plus side is he’s intelligent, decent. He’s not Ed Miliband, or Neil Kinnock. He’s not a nutcase like GB [Gordon Brown]. But he’s not John Smith, either — I mean, he’s like John Smith, but without his class … He’s basically a London human rights lawyer who’s not in touch with the people. He’s perceived as an over-smoothed lawyer-like person. Too soft, not tough enough, inexperienced.”

Even today, Blair acknowledges: “It’s possible that his journey isn’t like Neil Kinnock’s, where you start on the left and then you move right. I don’t think he really started anywhere except vaguely progressive.”

So whoever named him Mr FlipFlop seems to have been right.

I'm not sure that Boaty McBoatface knows what an HR manager does.

If he's saying that nobody's steering the ship... well, he's not wrong, but shouldn't he be doing something about that? He is the chief of staff after all.

Our American friends have just had four years of Joe Biden falling over and shaking hands with thin air, when it was obvious Joe wasn't running the White House but nobody knew who, if anyone, was.

But there was an obvious reason for that, what with the president being extremely old and not all there. I'm not sure what's happening with Starmer. There just seems to be a vacuum at the centre.

These things are possibly one in the same.

My dog caught a mouse the other day. She was completely shocked and dropped it, and it ran off into a closet.

The cynical part of me thinks maybe most Labour MPs quite like this.

They aren't bogged down in toeing the line. And far from Starmer or whoever packing out the WEC with TWAW advocates, they all just stamped their feet a bit and he went well okay then, we dont want to argue do we.

The problem with this approach (apart from selling women's sex based rights down the river) is that if there is no overarching policy who knows what someone with a bit a political expertise can get through the Parliamentary system.

Maybe cutting pensioners fuel allowance was one of these. Reeves always had a bit of fixation about and then suddenly one day it was policy.

In no time you could have mutual support circles bartering with a sort of you support my out to lunch suggestion, and we will support yours.

If no one is overseeing that policy and political goals are implemented in a joined up way, we will endlessly be going stop start.

But if nobody in the Labour Party has this over view is it any wonder that many of us are left perplexed as to WTF is going on and what is the end goal?

I find him an ineffectual PM and wouldn’t be at all surprised if the Labour Party felt leaderless. Before he was party leader I thought he was promising. But he comes across as weak, waffly and lacking in conviction. He seems like the kind of person who doesn’t want to “upset” anyone and is permanently on the fence. And I was deeply unimpressed by his moaning about difficult decisions, wearing that pained face. He wanted the job of PM, PMs have to make difficult decisions, he has no right to feel sorry for himself.

I think that anyone who wants to be PM of a country probably has to be a bit of an asshole and ruthless, and in some ways rather cold-hearted. Which is not to say that person can't be compassionate, because I don't see those as mutually exclusive. But I think people often believe they are.

But you'd have to be willing to make decisions where all possible outcomes are screwing someone, and make decisions where some people will hate you, and make decisions where history may not look back on you all that kindly.

Anyone who does not get this is in some sense a bit dumb and probably not fit for the job.

I'm not sure though if the voting public accepts that a good PM will have these kinds of qualities which is a problem when voting.

FictionalCharacter · Today 01:09

And I was deeply unimpressed by his moaning about difficult decisions, wearing that pained face.

As my Gran would have said:

Tsk! He looks like a constipated owl.

Starmer is pushed by other people on gender. Starmer himself has no strong instincts clearly. He does care about other stuff, not on that though.

Streeting is hugely important for the direction of Labour on gender and as Health minister has huge impact because he went all in on Cass and refusing to give way. Two weeks ago the Health dept once again fully backed Cass in response to a petition.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700217

Other leading figures like Rayner would have preferred to be "nice". Reeves is important because she is sceptical in certain ways, but more than that she controls the money and clearly doesn't see how trans stuff makes the UK money. Another key figure is the Shabana Mahmood Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain who is an open supporter of Labour Women's Declaration and also one of Starmer's closest allies and has huge influence. Yvette Cooper, Home Secretary, was scared to say anything back in 2022 but as soon as the ground was clear backed Cass. I think she is moving in right direction but too slowly. The other significant figure is David Dinosaur Lammy who since his prehistoric messup has desperately avoided talking about this stuff. His key priority is becoming mates with Trump right now and gender stuff doesn't help at all.

Most to the point does trans stuff win elections? Nope. There is a reason even the SNP is going back on it. With a huge threat coming from Reform electorally and the Tories also becoming more strident on this under Kemi moving away from genderism makes sense. Especially as it gives Labour an excuse to sideline Greens and Lb Dems.

Plus note Labour has continued the disaffiliating from Stonewall trend. Home Office and Treasury have both pulled out under Cooper and Reeves:

https://archive.is/xQHBv

We are seeing a slow drift to sanity in the UK with a bunch of dangerous holdouts. The NHS has a lot of them. Wales in particular, but even there the election in 2025 may see change. So keep fighting, accept there is progress, but the casualties along the way are vast too. It would be better to have a clean break, but it is still difficult right now. I think the climate in a few more years will change even more in a realistic direction as the medical/criminal scandals come out.

I find him a bit wishy washy, which is a shame because I was hoping for more, he's got potential it just seems to be wasted.

The suggestions are that Biden's term in office was actually Obama's third.

I think his role was to do and say what was thought necessary to get elected...which was to try to sound like a Tory on one hand ( but without the accompanying foundational values) and to say the right sort of things about social justice to appease the left wingers. But it was always clear he stood for nothing and would be shit as PM.

I do think Streeting has a political instinct, and not just on gender. I think he'd be better generally. And ironically it was gender that Starmer was, and has been, most resolute on. Let's not forget he made a pledge to " modernise the GRA"...which I think they are delaying at present - because the whole term in office, so far, has been such a shit show. Lots of Labour MPs are in the background, on committees etc, busy trying to discredit Cass.

Dom Cummings has been saying (and it's Dom, so health warnings apply) that Starmer reminds him of Boris circa 2021 - no plan for government, no idea who voted for him or what they wanted, no real idea of how to make Whitehall work for him.

If there's no direction from the centre, government becomes a matter of which secretaries of state have a bit of get up and go on any particular day. If it's Wes Streeting I'm happy with that, if's it's Bridget Phillipson less so.

Between the weird lack of leadership and the economic outlook, I would bet against him leading Labour into the next election, and the only reason I'd hesitate to bet is that Labour aren't very good at assassinating their leaders. I'm more confident saying that Kemi won't be leader at the election.

There's a chance they all prop each other up Starmer, Reeves and co until the GE even if they keep falling out of favour

McSweeney is said to have been pushing for months for a reshuffle, but that's proving to be a problem.

Difficult for Starmer to sack Reeves when her credibility is so closely bound up with his.

Difficult to sack or demote anyone else because nobody has fucked up as much as Reeves.

So the only Cabinet minister they've managed to get rid of was Louise Haigh, who was always the lowest hanging fruit.

And Labour rules make it almost impossible to get rid of a sitting PM who doesn't want to go.

McSweeney is said to have been pushing for months for a reshuffle

Not directly related to the article and Starmer being a people pleaser (well the people he thinks will help him be PM) the suggestion that reshuffle will solve the problems of the Labour Party seems non sensical.

Starmer or who ever is the PM should through discussion, agreements or whatever have some clear idea of objectives. All we have now is endless announcements about this that or the other of things that may be important, but seem to serve more as a distraction from the vaccuum at the heart of Labour.

They put so much effort into not being Corbyn (which was a response to news paper coverage) and then set about getting rid of anyone who didn't follow that agenda that they are now just an assorted group of camp followers who find who they should be following is equally not anything.

In a way I wouldn't mind if they just stopped coming up with headline grabbers and said something like the UK finances are so bad we are going to spend the first year working to improve that, and then in year 2 if things are better we will aim to do project x, and so on.

So even though I think Starmer it s complete waste of space he is the logical result of a party that put so much effort in purging and purifying and as a result they aren't really anything.

And the results of recent general elections show that Labour hasn't won over the public.

With Corbyn as leader the Labour Party got 12,877,918 in 2015, and 10,269,051 in 2019. And all Starmer could manage in 2024 was 9,708,716

ie we got the least popular Labour leader as PM, because so many Tories didn't vote.

No wonder it all feels a bit rudderless.

@IwantToRetire Yep, it was an anti-Tory vote overall not a strongly pro-Labour one. And of course some people who would normally vote Conservative went to Reform, and there was a significant “I can’t stand any of them” contingent who voted for an independent or not at all.

Well said.

I've known some excellent HR Managers in my time. It's not the insult some people think it is.

It's not the insult some people think it is.

Its not intended to be an insult.

It is about somebody behaving in a way that may in fact be very good if you are a HR Manger.

Although in Starmer's case if is more he is some worthy student counsellor trying to get adversarial young people to play nice when they find themselves on some terrible outing that no one really wanted to go on.

ie placating and wheedling is not the way to run a country.

Although as I said up thread the remnants of the Labour Party that are now MPs only have themselves to blame.

He doesn't even seem to be the CE of a Board making sure everyone is following the business plan for the next year.

McSweeney is said to have been pushing for months for a reshuffle

I meant to add to my earlier comment about this, that of course the real problem is that McSweeney (with others ie Labour Together) plotted and planned for years to get rid of Corbyn just because he was left wing as they assumed Labour would get more votes if it was centrist. (which election figures prove him / them to be wrong)

So having got his puppet into post the idea that having a reshuffle will suddenly make what is effectively an artificial creation more effective or even meaningful is just stupid.

Even he doesn't like what is happening know he shouldn't have meddled and intrigued for all those years.

Not forgetting that in terms of the sometimes brutal manner in which candidates were imposed on constituencies, the deep distrust he has created.

Maybe the reshuffle is to get him out of Labour's central office.

Imagine all those years of manipulation and back stabbing to have created this uninspiring, not very effective, and certainly valueless Government.