Keir Starmer’s disillusioned MPs finally find their voice

LONDON — In a crowded Turkish restaurant on Monday night, two of the British Labour Party’s most infamous power brokers rallied the troops.

Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson, who turned up at a fundraising event with No. 10 chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, said every day in government was tough, and today’s media made it even harder than his time as a minister two decades ago.

Just how hard became clear 15 minutes later. The media was not to blame.

A mile away in parliament, more than 100 of Keir Starmer’s own MPs had launched a mass effort to kill a £5 billion plank of his agenda.

The scale and format of an amendment against the prime minister’s cuts to disability benefits blindsided some in government, and left the PM scrambling to agree concessions this week. It also led to dark mutterings about the authority of McSweeney — who led Labour to a landslide in last year’s election on a strategy of suppressing the left.

While British politics is no stranger to civil war, Starmer’s army was meant to be different. McSweeney’s aides selected candidates so ruthlessly for loyalty that the media nicknamed them Starmtroopers.

But some MPs see the welfare issue as a tipping point after months of frustration at difficult decisions, U-turns and what they brand a lack of engagement from No. 10 — just as May’s local election results suggest they will lose to Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in 2029.

With 400 Labour MPs scrambling for a legacy, some also fear they are running out of time to become a minister, or make any mark at all.

Many of the MPs coming out of their shell are those on the so-called “soft left,” rather than the centrist model of McSweeney. Many remain loyal. But one Cabinet minister said MPs — Tory and Labour alike — are now more willing to speak their minds “across the board.”

“Lots of colleagues just don’t feel that they are listened to or that they have a way to shape policy and thinking,” said a second Cabinet minister. Like around two dozen Labour MPs, ministers and officials who spoke to POLITICO, they were granted anonymity to speak frankly.

Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson said every day in government was tough, and today’s media made it even harder than his time as a minister two decades ago. | Pool Photo by Bonnie Cash via EPA

They added: “I think it’s blown into the welfare bill in particular, but it’s part of a wider frustration. Some of it is reasonable — they want to be listened to and involved. But sometimes the work of government is delivering the things you said you were going to do.”

‘I’ve never had a conversation with him’

Keir Starmer heads an army of 402 MPs. There’s one problem: some of them have never met him.

“I met him on the day we had our group picture taken — in the sense he moved through the crowd,” Neil Duncan-Jordan, a new MP, told POLITICO by WhatsApp. 

“I’ve never had a conversation with him. He’s never sent me a note congratulating me on my amazing victory etc. The public can’t believe it, but it’s true. I doubt he knows who I am.” A second backbencher told POLITICO they had never met the PM in their life.

Starmer’s brisk, efficient style is his sales pitch; as PM his big promise is “delivery.” Yet those qualities now work against him, argued Mark Spencer, chief whip for almost three years under Boris Johnson. 

During Spencer’s time a Tory majority of 80 collapsed into chaos amid stories of Downing Street parties during the COVID pandemic.

Ironically, Spencer argues Johnson’s problem was that he couldn’t host drinks for MPs due to the virus. “If I were the chief whip [now], I would be chewing the ear of No. 10 saying, you’ve got to open those doors. You’ve got to try and schmooze these Labour MPs,” he said. 

MPs need to have fun, Spencer added: “There are a lot of upsides to being an MP, aren’t there? You know, visits with APPGs [single-issue pressure groups] or social events. Some of the lobbying events [are] actually quite pleasant. And MPs in the 2019 intake got all the hassle … without any of the upside.”

When Tory MPs oversaw austerity cuts in 2010, Spencer says PM David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne visited the Commons tearoom regularly. That helped steel them for the electoral fight in 2015.

But one Labour frontbencher said Starmer, while he does visit the tearoom, is “not a fucking regular … he doesn’t know anyone there. He doesn’t go to Stranger’s [the bar for MPs], he doesn’t go out on the terrace, he doesn’t vote very often. And it’s led to more of an ‘us and them’ mentality between parliament and No. 10 than was necessary.”

They added: “The mood of the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party] is really fractured. [Some] people are now entrenched in their positions … everywhere you look there are huddled conversations. You know whether their names are on the list [of rebels] or not. It makes for quite a tense atmosphere.”

For months, Starmer has hosted Wednesday lunches with Pret a Manger sandwiches in his Commons office with small groups of MPs. 

One Labour MP, however, complained: “It’s not a proper meeting. He likes to muse about what he said to Macron at some summit or another but it’s like there’s nothing there behind the eyes.”

Starmer is making up for lost time. The PM phoned rebels personally on Thursday night in a bid to reach a compromise over the welfare cuts — while his Chief Whip, Alan Campbell, went on the Commons terrace.

‘There’s no engagement’

Several MPs have been demanding more attention from the relatively small No. 10 political team, led by seasoned former No. 10 aide Claire Reynolds and ultimately presided over by McSweeney.

One MP complained to POLITICO in January: “There’s no engagement, nothing. It’s astonishing really.”

Some MPs who dislike McSweeney’s politics lament the departure of Luke Sullivan, Starmer’s former political director who was not brought into government when Labour took office last summer, and Keir Cozens, who left his role as PLP Secretary in 2023.

They were “of a slightly different part of the party, and have broad appeal and good relationships,” said one Labour official. Instead, the official argued, there are “the remnants of quite a factional operation.”

The frontbencher quoted above added: “After Luke left … they’ve never really invested time in it, whether that’s staff time or the prime minister’s time. You get your set-piece roundtable, your set-piece trip into No. 10 but that’s it.”

One Labour regional mayor suggested No. 10 was too preoccupied with seeming tough: “There are too many books being read in No. 10 about Machiavelli, and not enough books about charm and love.”

Starmer’s and McSweeney’s allies insist the criticism is unfair. One supportive frontbencher said letters go out constantly to engage with MPs, and there are “hundreds of hours of meetings.”

A third cabinet minister said some rebels had signed the amendment against welfare cuts without realizing that it could sink the entire bill. 

Another loyal MP pointed out plenty of their colleagues are still diehard supporters of the government. “When I looked at the list of names on the [welfare] amendment, there were only one or two who surprised me,” they added.

Downing Street figures argue that Reeves’ spending review this month — which poured billions of capital investment into infrastructure projects — left MPs feeling happier. | Andy Rain/EPA

But a loyal senior member of the government argued: “They [MPs] are not spoken to, they’re not listened to … their thoughts just aren’t considered.” Pointing the finger at McSweeney, they added: “For the inner group of people, this has always been their problem — they don’t understand politicians.

“I don’t think it’s a fundamental breakdown, but I think it is about an urgent need for a reset. And I don’t mean a reset like ‘go on the TV and do a speech,’ I’m talking about internal things. They need a radical shake-up.”

Finding their voice

The welfare cuts created a perfect storm, but grumblings started earlier.

The first noses were put out of joint last summer, when a small group of new MPs received promotions to ministerial ranks. Other MPs eyeing their legacy fear they will never be promoted, even though there are persistent rumors of a July reshuffle.

One ambitious new MP said: “A lot of people say ‘I’ve got no chance of getting a job so I’ll have to do things by other means.’ [No. 10] haven’t done a wide enough job of showing people it’s a possibility.”

Another Labour MP put it more bluntly: “I don’t want to have spent four years of my life as lobby fodder for a government I often didn’t agree with.”

Plenty of issues have now arrived where MPs can use that voice. Several cited the recent debate over assisted dying, where MPs had to make up their own mind rather than following the party whip, as a clarifying moment.

Learning how parliamentary procedure works is also making MPs more confident, just as they finally settle on their friends, their pet issues — and perhaps in future, their factions. 

Formal groups of Labour MPs are centered around old “red wall” seats, growth, coastal areas, specific regions, rural seats, the socially conservative “Blue Labour” movement, trade unions, the Co-Op Party and a new group, Labour Future. While several of these back the government forcefully, they still create more bases for MPs away from No. 10.

Whips have noted an uptick in skirmishes in recent months with the left-wing Socialist Campaign Group, some of whose members lost the whip after rebelling on welfare cuts last year. One Labour official said drily: “It’s tolerated as long as it’s at a low level and not very visible.”

Individual issues drive MPs too. New MP Chris Hinchliff challenged the government over its bill to free up housing developments, while Paul Waugh, the Labour MP for Rochdale, backed (with caveats) calls for a national inquiry into grooming gangs in January, when the government was still resisting one. The war between Israel and Gaza — and the U.K.’s restrained response — has tested many MPs’ resolve.

‘Open season’

The question in No. 10 will be what comes next.

Speculation continues within government that a small number of frontbenchers will resign over welfare cuts, though it was not immediately clear if this would be prevented by Starmer’s planned concessions on Thursday.

Keir Starmer heads an army of 402 MPs. There’s one problem: some of them have never met him. | Pool photo by Chris Ratcliffe via EPA

Starmer’s allies recently downplayed talk of a ministerial reshuffle in July, arguing the prime minister and McSweeney view personnel changes as a long-term strategy for the next election.

Whenever the next reshuffle does happen, it will create a moment of danger, argued one person who speaks regularly to No. 10. They said: “Once that’s passed, it’s sort of going to be open season, especially as a lot of MPs are now contemplating just being a one-term MP.”

Another moment of danger from “soft left” MPs will be the government’s delayed child poverty strategy, which two people in government said was likely to be tied to Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ budget in the autumn.

Senior figures in government have been pushing for the strategy to end the two-child limit on benefits, a prospect Starmer has not ruled out.

A Labour figure close to No. 10 said the strategy would spend large amounts of money. They added: “Keir cares passionately about reducing child poverty. He thinks it’s one of the defining purposes of a Labour government. 

“So he’ll be absolutely clear he has to make sure child poverty is lower at the end of the parliament than the beginning. He’d be mortified if it wasn’t — and I think he’ll pull whatever levers are needed to prevent it.”

MPs will then face Reeves’ autumn budget — with all the speculation that it will raise taxes — and a king’s speech laying out the next phase of Starmer’s agenda. Some are already arguing that backbench MPs should be consulted about the next king’s speech.

Downing Street figures argue that Reeves’ spending review this month — which poured billions of capital investment into infrastructure projects — left MPs feeling happier.

But with difficult Scottish and Welsh elections coming next May, some MPs continue to feel gloomy.

A frontbencher said: “I think if things haven’t shifted in a year’s time, the center simply can’t carry on as it is … we have 12 months to really prove ourselves.” They dismissed talk of blaming McSweeney, saying: “It’s a Keir problem. He has to take responsibility.”

One MP on the Labour left put it more bluntly: “I just can’t see him leading us into the next election. He’s just so damaged on what he is and who he is. You’ve got to stand for something, haven’t you?”

That prospect remains remote, for now — but more of Starmer’s MPs are taking a stand anyway.

Emilio Casalicchio, Annabelle Dickson, Noah Keate and Andrew McDonald contributed reporting.