A year into Labour’s commanding victory – with Sir Keir Starmer’s government enjoying what was billed as a “whopping” majority – the buzz of internal dissent is growing loud. Calls are already emerging to replace Starmer and his chancellor, Rachel Reeves – a situation which is as dramatic as it is telling.
Labour’s honeymoon has been anything but peaceful. From nationwide riots to vociferous farmer protests objecting to tax and welfare reforms, and the recent backlash over controversial changes to the Personal Independence Payment (PIP), the party finds itself besieged not just from the right or the left, but from its own backbenches. Reeves’s highly-publicised tears during Prime Minister’s Questions – triggered by her anger over the PIP U-turn – may have rallied sympathy in some corners, but it has also underscored a harsher reality: party unity is fraying.
READ MORE: ‘They can’t organise a p*ss-up in a brewery’ – Steve Coogan rips into Reform
But Labour’s troubles reflect a national malaise. Since the 2016 Brexit referendum, Britain has cycled through no fewer than six prime ministers in under a decade – David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak – and now Starmer have all had the key to Number 10. Truss’s 49-day premiership remains a cautionary tale of speed without stability. This revolving door of leadership speaks to a deeper problem: a country increasingly unwilling to tolerate indecision, complexity – or consequences.
Yet if Starmer is suffering from political whiplash, he’s far from alone. The Reform Party – a byproduct of Brexit idealism – positions itself as the true heir to public frustration. Nigel Farage’s return at its helm coincided with a surge in popularity, but the movement remains dogged by internal turmoil. James McMurdock, a Reform MP, recently resigned the whip amid a scandal over Bounce Back loans – leaving the party with a mere four Commons seats . Rupert Lowe, expelled earlier this year, has now launched a rival organisation, Restore Britain, citing authoritarian leadership by Farage. Alongside Advance UK, launched by Ben Habib, there are clear signs of Brexit’s divisive energy even among its strongest advocates.
This fragmentation across parties begs the question: is Britain brewing its own brand of political chaos? Brexit has unleashed torrents of public expectation on sovereignty, immigration, economic self-determination. But when those ambitions confront the realities of governance and compromise, the backlash is swift. Politicians are punished for complexity, rewarded only for boldness – until boldness stumbles. The result: frequent leadership changes, policy U-turns, and electorate disillusionment.
Yet this isn’t the hallmark of a healthy democracy – it’s the symptom of one fraying. The old social contract – political parties presenting coherent visions, voters granting time for delivery – crumbles. Now, electability hinges on instant satisfaction. From the industrial heartland to rural villages, exhaustion with pendulum politics is palpable.
Is Britain truly ungovernable? That’s a stark diagnosis. But what we’re witnessing is a parliament – and a society – struggling to reconcile intricate modern problems with simplistic political demands. Until public discourse nourishes nuance over one-liners, and politicians are rewarded for steadiness over spectacle, this instability may well define our era.
In short: Brexit did more than redraw our relationship with Europe; it rewired Britain’s political DNA. In its wake, governing is now a near-impossible balancing act – each move is a potential breaking point. Unless political leadership and public expectations evolve together, we may be locked in a vicious feedback loop of protest, panic, and policy breakdown.