Ramos Leo
This relentless churn raises a fundamental question: What forces are driving this narrative? Why is the UK seemingly disposing of its leaders with a frequency once associated with Italian politics? Why do both voters and Members of Parliament grant and withdraw their support with such apparent ease? In essence, is Britain becoming ungovernable?
For Sir Keir Starmer, the answer is unequivocally "No." At a recent news conference, the Prime Minister firmly stated, "I don’t think Britain is ungovernable." His Conservative counterpart, Kemi Badenoch, echoed this sentiment in the House of Commons, declaring, "Britain is not ungovernable." Yet, both leaders preside over parties whose MPs have, in recent memory, displayed a readiness for political regicide. They navigate a labyrinthine administrative, regulatory, and judicial framework that can impede policy implementation. Moreover, they appeal to an electorate that appears increasingly impatient for immediate results and less willing to accept the inherent trade-offs of governing.
Is this merely a particularly turbulent chapter in British history, leaving leaders buffeted by external events? Or does the persistent turmoil at Westminster signal deeper, systemic flaws within the UK’s political landscape?
Events, Dear Boy
One perspective suggests that the challenges facing the political class are simply immense. This era has tested every generation of leaders with a succession of global crises: the lingering repercussions of the 2008 financial crash, the profound political and economic dislocations of Brexit, the unprecedented economic shock of the Covid-19 pandemic, the energy crisis sparked by the war in Ukraine, and the systemic disruption caused by figures like US President Donald Trump. These are not uniquely British problems; many world leaders are grappling with similar pressures, and incumbent governments across Europe have faltered in the face of economic headwinds and increasingly demanding electorates.
However, doubts persist about how well UK leaders have risen to these challenges. Hannah White, CEO of the Institute for Government (IFG) think tank, observes, "The UK is not ‘ungovernable,’ but its political parties have handed the country a series of prime ministers lacking in key leadership skills at a time when crises have hit thick and fast and a number of trends are making governing substantially harder." Professor Anand Menon, director of the UK in a Changing Europe think tank, concurs, noting, "Our system provides significant power to a government with a majority. That this majority has not been deployed [to drive through change] to date is a failure of leadership rather than being indicative of a systematic trend towards ungovernability." Historian Sir Anthony Seldon, a biographer of multiple prime ministers, argues that some recent incumbents – including Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and even Sir Keir Starmer – have lacked the requisite political acumen for the job and the humility to seek assistance. "They didn’t have the skills and weren’t willing to bring people in," he states, drawing a contrast with past prime ministers like Margaret Thatcher, who, despite her formidable reputation, relied on mentors like Willie Whitelaw.
Grit in the Machine
Beyond the calibre of leaders, some MPs contend that the civil service is failing to provide adequate support, with Whitehall often perceived as obstructive. Baroness Cavendish, former head of David Cameron’s policy unit, told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme, "Every government seems to come in and is astonished… that things are so difficult to do. Many Labour ministers have said to me that they might actually agree with what Dominic Cummings [former Boris Johnson adviser] said about parts of the civil service needing reform." This sentiment was publicly echoed by Sir Keir Starmer himself before the House of Commons Liaison Committee last December, where he complained of "frustration that every time I go to pull a lever, there are a whole bunch of regulations, consultations and arm’s length bodies that mean the action from pulling the lever to delivery is longer than I think it ought to be."
Civil servants, typically constrained from public comment, privately push back against these criticisms, with some blaming ministers for a lack of clear guidance and coherent instructions. They question whether the political class has, in fact, forgotten how to effectively govern. One long-serving Whitehall official lamented, "The contempt for the civil service, now amply reciprocated, has left the means by which politicians implement their policy frightened and wary." This veteran suggested that politicians "are increasingly like children. Agog and overawed at winning office and too frightened to do anything with it once they are there."
Furthermore, critics point to Downing Street itself as an institution, arguing it is woefully ill-equipped and understaffed to manage a modern government, despite successive administrations centralising power even further within its walls. This centralisation, some argue, leads to a bottleneck of unresolved decisions and leaves individual ministers feeling disempowered. Lord Hill, who served as John Major’s political secretary in the 1990s, contends, "The centralisation of power in No 10 and the Cabinet Office – and the obsession with news management – has made the job of a minister far less relevant and powerful. It’s a miracle that people are still prepared to go into politics and become ministers." But are contemporary events, perceived poor leadership, and a creaking civil service sufficient to explain Britain’s current political disorder?
Drama Addiction
Many observers also point to the pervasive influence of social media, which has dramatically accelerated the political process, arguably to a point of near unmanageability. Theo Bertram, a former adviser to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown and now director of the Social Market Foundation, told the PM programme, "There is a structural problem which is that all the things we need to do to fix the country, they are going to take 10 years. But if you are prime minister, you don’t have 10 years. In the age of social media, what you have is a lot of short-termism." Social media platforms, including encrypted messaging apps, have made backbench rebellion at Westminster considerably easier and nuanced policy discussions far harder. Steve Baker, a former Tory MP and key figure in Brexit plotting, noted, "Whips and ministers arrive too late to a conversation that social media concluded an hour ago. Today, the same mechanisms are being deployed inside Labour: mini ‘power centres’ built around WhatsApp lists, organising against their own leader in days rather than months."
Some commentators also lay responsibility at the feet of the media. Nick Bryant, a political commentator and former BBC colleague, believes the "excitability of journalists" is "part of the problem," arguing that "drama addiction among both politicians and the political reporters who cover them… fuels the constant cycle of chaos and uncertainty that is becoming so democratically destabilising." The intensely divisive politics surrounding Brexit, many believe, poisoned the political well, fostering a culture of perpetual turmoil and rebellion. Conservative MPs grew accustomed to replacing their leaders. Have the current generation of Labour MPs observed and absorbed this culture, perceiving it as normal when, historically, it is an aberration? Successive studies suggest that backbenchers are indeed becoming less obedient, with rebellion, once rare in post-war parliaments, becoming increasingly common during the Major, Blair, and coalition governments as backbenchers gained confidence and traditional party management mechanisms weakened.
Yet, is this the entire story? The very nature of British politics appears to be shifting. The rise of smaller parties, such as Reform UK and the Greens, is increasingly challenging the traditional duopoly of Labour and the Conservatives. This trend means that while the current government may command a sizable parliamentary majority, its share of the popular vote is often paltry, thus yielding a weaker perceived mandate. This fragmentation is unlikely to abate. Lord Wood, a former adviser to Gordon Brown, observes, "Both main parties have had problems in government due to internal problems. The Conservative Party’s travails in government were largely the result of Brexit fracturing the party and making party management impossible. The Labour Party has been strangely cursed by its loveless landslide in 2024, without having a clear governing agenda to unite the party and set course once in power."
Some argue that the problem runs even deeper: the fracturing of traditional party loyalties reflects a broader failure by the political class to confront the scale of the problems the UK faces – from structural economic weakness, persistently high immigration, and weakening relations with traditional allies in Europe and the US, to an increasing energy dependence on a volatile Middle East.
Managing Expectations
This points to a broader issue: political leadership itself. Have prime ministers forgotten how to craft compelling arguments, to present their parties and voters with honest policy choices and necessary trade-offs? Where leaders once promised short-term pain for long-term gain, do they now offer instant gratification that is almost invariably undelivered? This approach fuels disillusionment and a corrosive loss of trust. In the most recent election, neither of the two largest parties were entirely candid about the prospects for tax rises and spending cuts.
Lord Hill laments that many in Westminster seem to have forgotten that politics is fundamentally about deciding what you want, making a persuasive argument for it, and garnering widespread support at a general election. "Instead, they think their job is to find out what different groups want, thread a needle through all the positions and assemble enough votes to get them over the line," he argues. "We’ve moved from government and parliament being a transmission mechanism into one that receives messages like a giant lobbying machine." Theo Bertram adds, "One of the things that we haven’t seen so much in recent prime ministers is that ability to take on their own backbenches, to take on the public and tell them difficult things."
Indeed, politicians have yet to level honestly with the electorate about the urgent need to address welfare budgets, increase defence spending, undertake radical NHS reform, and boost national productivity – all of which would entail short-term pain and, some believe, a necessary rebalancing of state support from older to younger generations. Politics is a constant process of persuasion and even seduction, and prime ministers appear to have forgotten that this is an almost continuous effort of wooing voters, MPs, and civil servants to maintain momentum for their agenda.
Perhaps, too, voters have become overly impatient. In an era of instant online purchases delivered to our doors within hours, do we now demand faster political results at a rate no government could possibly deliver? The surging support for anti-establishment parties like Reform UK and the Greens is a clear symptom of voters’ disillusionment with mainstream parties, which they perceive as having failed to address the nation’s pressing problems. Sir John Major, the former prime minister, agreed with Matt Chorley on BBC Radio 5 Live that voters crave quick and easy answers to complex problems. "I’m afraid we do, and that is because nobody is telling us we can’t have that," he said. "Governments have lost the capacity, it seems, to say no. And part of the job of politics is to say, no."
Here, perhaps, lies the crux of the issue: the widening gap of expectations between the governed and those who seek to govern. In the past, prime ministers could often spend their way out of trouble. Leaders of the right could promise tax cuts; leaders of the left could pledge increased welfare spending. Both options are now considerably less viable. Tory promises of unfunded tax cuts – and Labour hints at easing fiscal rules to borrow more – spook the bond markets in equal measure. Yet, the UK economy appears trapped in a cycle of low growth, high debt, and stagnating real incomes, with voters feeling the bitter reality of a persistent cost-of-living crisis. The Tories promised a Brexit boom, Labour promised growth; neither has fully materialised. This leaves many feeling that government is failing to deliver for them, which, in turn, makes governing inherently harder.
"Pressures on public services are rising," says Hannah White from the IFG. "Public expectations are high but government room for manoeuvre is limited. The public, seldom faced with trade-offs, has become accustomed to the sort of sweeping government intervention we saw during the pandemic and Ukraine energy crises, and struggles to understand why today’s cost of living pressures remain unchecked. But lack of money seriously constrains policy choices." Sir Anthony Seldon warns that the situation could worsen: "What would be very dangerous is an economic and political crisis at the same time. In the past, we have had financial crises without political instability. If you have both, that is really serious."
Hard Truths
So, what might offer a path out of this cycle of chaos? Lord Wood suggests that our leaders must be "prepared to tell hard truths to the country, especially on fiscal realities, defence and security, and lead the country through the pain required to respond; and develop an agenda based on a clear view of the world, identifiable values and grounded optimism about the future, to unite their parties and inspire voters again." Sir John Major echoed that call for straight talking: "There are millions of people out there who’d be only too pleased to hear a politician stand up and set out absolutely clearly and honestly and unmistakably the depth of the problems we face and the sort of measures we are going to have to take in order to protect ourselves."
This approach, however, would require voters willing to accept difficult trade-offs and grant politicians the necessary time to implement solutions. It would also demand political parties ready to confront uncomfortable truths and to bring the electorate along with them. Above all, it would depend on competent leadership and prime ministers who can survive long enough to implement the promises they made to voters. In an era where the longest-serving incumbent in Downing Street is arguably Larry the cat, the challenge of governing has become a problem not just for politicians, but for the entire nation.
Top picture credits: Bloomberg / AFP / Getty Images
Nana Banana
Roy Suryo
Nakalama John