Is Britain's political instability a sign of ungovernability? The question has been on many minds, especially after the recent churn of leaders under the Conservative government, which saw the party cycle through three leaders in one year. This has led to a revolving door at 10 Downing Street, leaving many to wonder if Britain is becoming ungovernable. But, as Anthony Seldon, a renowned biographer of British prime ministers, argues, Britain is categorically not ungovernable. Instead, he points to a string of failings among Starmer's Conservative forerunners, painting them as 'Rooseveltian' in ambition but 'Reaganite' in delivery. Seldon's biography of Starmer's predecessor, Rishi Sunak, is due to be published in August, and by then, Britain may have a new prime minister – its sixth in seven years. This constant turnover is not just a symptom of political instability, but also a reflection of the country's deeper problems. Britain never truly recovered from the 2008 financial crisis, and its departure from the European Union is estimated to have lowered GDP per person by as much as 8%. Productivity growth is tepid, debt has crept up, and Britain has the highest industrial electricity costs in the G7. Moreover, Britain's electoral system is showing strain. The decline of the duopoly between Labour and the Conservatives has effectively turned British politics from a two-way fight into a five-way or six-way battle in England, Scotland, and Wales. This has led to a fragmentation of the political landscape, with nationalist parties supporting Scottish and Welsh independence, which could lead to the breakup of the United Kingdom. Against this backdrop, it is easy to despair of good government. But Seldon believes that this despair only exculpates Starmer – and his less-than-impressive predecessors. In my opinion, Starmer's struggles are not just a result of his own shortcomings, but also a reflection of the broader political and economic challenges facing Britain. One thing that immediately stands out is the lack of a compelling political story. After the 2008 financial crisis, David Cameron arrived at Britain's sickbed with a clear diagnosis: the previous Labour government had spent too much, and it would take a period of painful belt-tightening to restore Britain's financial health. The Conservatives were unable to cut their way to growth, and austerity failed on both counts. Nonetheless, Cameron was reelected in 2015, having enjoyed some modest economic growth in the year before the election. By contrast, Starmer has had no message to hammer home. He promised 'change', without specifying what, or how. This lack of a compelling story has left Starmer struggling to make his achievements felt. His government has been constrained, and has had to hunt for revenue from small, politically unpopular sources. In my view, Starmer's struggles are not just a result of his own shortcomings, but also a reflection of the broader political and economic challenges facing Britain. The public is swayed by the 'snake oil' sold by Reform or the Greens, which Starmer says could take Britain down a 'very dark path'. But a prime minister must make their achievements felt. If you're a bad salesman, no matter how good the products you have for sale, every time you try to make a sale, it gets worse. Britain risks reading too much into Starmer's struggles, which, in my opinion, are largely due to his lack of charisma and inability to sell things. This raises a deeper question: is Britain addicted to changing its prime minister, as English soccer clubs have become addicted to changing their managers? Some pundits warn that Britain has become addicted to this cycle, and that Starmer's struggles are just another symptom of this addiction. In my opinion, this addiction is not just a result of political instability, but also a reflection of the broader cultural and psychological challenges facing Britain. The stakes are high for Starmer's Labour Party. Many Labour lawmakers are looking to Andy Burnham, the Labour Mayor of Greater Manchester, who is seen as a better salesman. Burnham champions 'Manchesterism' – a brand of 'aspirational', business-friendly socialism that seeks to put essential services back in public control. His policies have helped make Manchester the fastest-growing city in the country. However, Burnham's route to Downing Street is fraught and uncertain. He cannot challenge Starmer's leadership of the Labour Party without first winning a seat in parliament. If Burnham loses to Reform in the special election, this could sound the death knell on Labour's electoral prospects for years to come and send Britain further down the 'dark path' warned of by Starmer. In my opinion, this scenario is not just a possibility, but a real risk. If Burnham fails, it could mean that Britain is truly becoming ungovernable. The question of whether Britain is ungovernable is complex and multifaceted. While the country's political and economic challenges are real, the solution lies not in despair, but in finding a compelling political story and a better salesman. In my view, the future of Britain depends on whether it can overcome its addiction to changing prime ministers and find a leader who can sell the necessary reforms to the public. Only then can Britain truly become ungovernable.
