One year ago, Keir Starmer stood triumphant, riding the wave of a political landslide that ended 18 years of Conservative rule and delivered Labour a towering 172-seat majority.
On the steps of Downing Street, with history at his back and hope in his voice, he declared, “The work of change begins immediately.” He promised to rebuild Britain, reviving the NHS, rescuing the economy, and igniting a new era of housebuilding. And he asked the nation to judge him not by his words, but by his actions.
Now, twelve months later, the glow of victory has dimmed. The burdens of power weigh heavy, and the realities of governing have brought both milestones and missteps. And who could have imagined that Labour, on the anniversary of its greatest electoral triumph in a generation, would be facing the fiercest rebellion yet against its own leadership?
A whopping 120 of his MPs have signed a wrecking amendment to Labour’s welfare bill, which aims to cut £5bn from Britain’s bulging spending on disability benefit. A party that promised stability now offers its own brand of chaos.
Battered by political missteps, weighed down by a sluggish economy, and sidetracked by foreign crises that have stretched public finances thin, Keir Starmer’s government has struggled to find its footing. Labour now trails Reform UK, a rising, anti-immigration insurgent party, in the polls. While Starmer faces no immediate threat to his leadership and the next general election isn’t due until 2029, his personal approval ratings have plummeted, even among Labour’s own base ad it shows.
Plenty of voices are offering solutions, from tightening his messaging to better managing his restive MPs, but the path to recovery remains uncertain. However, many also feel that a year is too soon for judgement and that the Prime Minister needs the time and space to work at his own pace.
Today, the government finds itself besieged by internal dissent, policy U-turns and a dramatic drop in public support. Once hailed as a steady hand promising a return to integrity and delivery in politics, Starmer’s premiership is now marked by mounting rebellion on the backbenches, a wavering narrative, and questions about who is truly in charge.
Still, these efforts at delivering change have been frequently undermined by poor messaging and escalating internal tensions. As a result, Labour’s list of early achievements remains marred by a growing perception of a government struggling to communicate its purpose—and increasingly vulnerable to internal dissent.
Policy wins and early moves
Labour's first year in power has seen the government introduce several significant policy measures.
On the economic front, Chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced a major tax overhaul designed to address what Labour described as a £22 billion fiscal hole left by the Conservatives. The package included a rise in employers’ national insurance contributions and a cap on inheritance tax relief for farmers, moves that were seen as both pragmatic and politically risky.
Labour has also made visible strides on the global stage. Starmer’s handling of international diplomacy has been widely praised, particularly for securing a key trade agreement with the United States and reinforcing the UK's commitment to Ukraine. These achievements, while overshadowed at home, bolstered Britain’s standing abroad and provided reassurance to businesses and international partners alike.
Domestically, the government delivered a significant pay boost for low-income workers by raising the national minimum wage to £12.21 per hour. This 6.7 percent increase reflected Labour’s promise to tackle the cost-of-living crisis and strengthen protections for working people.
In the health sector, a substantial £29 billion funding increase for the NHS is beginning to show results. NHS waiting lists, while still long, have declined by around five percent. Key performance indicators such as ambulance response times and cancer treatment targets have improved marginally—small but symbolic signs of progress.
Labour’s long-term ambitions for a greener economy also began to take shape. The passage of the Great British Energy Act in May marked a major step forward, establishing a publicly owned clean energy company tasked with accelerating the transition to net zero. Alongside this, the launch of the National Wealth Fund and planning reforms have signalled a serious commitment to infrastructure investment and sustainable development.
The transport sector, another critical area of public dissatisfaction, saw early action. Passenger rail services have been brought back into public ownership through new legislation passed in November, and a £1 billion fund has been established to revitalise local bus networks. These measures reflect Labour’s promise to restore reliable and affordable public transport.
On national security, the government launched a Strategic Defence Review shortly after taking office. It laid the groundwork for increasing defence spending to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2027—an important signal of intent in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.
The government has also put forward reforms in education, particularly within the area of special needs provision. These proposals aim to promote greater inclusivity by integrating more children into mainstream schools, and by reducing dependence on expensive private alternatives.
A look at foreign policy
In its first year, the Labour government has sought to reposition Britain on the global stage with a distinctly pragmatic foreign policy. Marked more by steady realignment than bold declarations, Labour’s approach has emphasised competence, diplomacy, and strategic partnership. But critics argue that this cautious reset often lacks coherence, and at times, conviction.
One of the earliest priorities for the new government was mending ties with the European Union. A reset agreement signed in May 2025 signalled a thaw in post-Brexit relations, focusing on enhanced cooperation in defence, carbon-border tariffs, fishing, and youth mobility. Starmer also signed a bilateral security agreement with Germany and re-engaged with European defence initiatives, signalling a subtle but significant shift back toward Brussels.
Relations with India were also brought to the fore. After years of coolness, Starmer declared a “reset” and followed through with high-level diplomatic outreach and economic engagement. This culminated in a landmark trade agreement in May, which promised major tariff reductions and was part of a broader trio of trade deals with India, the EU, and the US. The agreement is expected to add billions to the UK economy, though its full benefits remain to be seen.
In Washington, Starmer has walked a tightrope in dealing with President Donald Trump’s second administration. Despite ideological differences, Labour succeeded in preserving key trade dialogues and securing tariff relief on UK exports like steel and cars.
Defence and national security have been key pillars of Labour’s foreign agenda. The UK reaffirmed its commitment to Ukraine, hosting a major summit and increasing investment in defence sectors like cyberwarfare and armoured vehicles. But Labour’s migration strategy has faced setbacks. Despite launching a Border Security Command and tightening coordination with France, illegal Channel crossings hit record levels, prompting criticism from the opposition for failing to deliver.
On the Middle East, Labour adopted a more independent stance. Starmer condemned aspects of Israel’s actions in Gaza and froze trade negotiations with Tel Aviv. The government backed EU-led diplomatic pressure while managing internal dissent, with several Labour MPs and councillors openly calling for a ceasefire against party orders.
Overall, Labour’s foreign policy in its first year reflects a turn toward realism and relationship-building. Yet as international challenges intensify, questions remain about whether a strategy built on caution can stand the test of crisis and expectation.
Political drifts ad multiple U-turns
In its first year in government, Labour set out to prove it could deliver change with discipline and responsibility. But several key policies have not only failed to land but have actively harmed the party’s image, triggered internal revolts, and raised questions about the direction of Keir Starmer’s leadership.
Public awareness remains low, and the government’s messaging has often failed to cut through the political noise. Three major reversals in just two months dealt a heavy blow to Labour’s credibility: the controversial plan to cut winter fuel payments for pensioners, a prolonged refusal followed by an abrupt announcement of a grooming gangs inquiry, and welfare reform proposals that sparked one of the most bitter rebellions in recent Labour history.
Labour also stumbled badly on immigration messaging. In a speech early this year, Starmer warned that Britain risked becoming an “island of strangers,” a phrase that drew immediate comparisons to Enoch Powell’s infamous anti-immigration rhetoric. Starmer later admitted he hadn’t realised the phrase’s historical weight, nor had he reviewed the speech properly before delivering it. The incident undermined confidence in his judgment and raised concerns about the control he has over his own political narrative.
Other controversies fed the perception of a government adrift. Labour donor Lord Alli was revealed to have given gifts to Starmer and other ministers, raising questions about access and propriety. The party was forced to declare it would no longer accept similar donations.
Even successful policies, such as the reduction in NHS waiting lists and reforms to early-release prison schemes, have been overshadowed by mismanagement and a failure to communicate effectively with the public or parliament. The winter fuel cut, for instance, came to symbolise Labour’s tone-deaf approach to economic pain.
Falling polls and fraying authority
Labour’s support has nosedived from 37% in January to just 23%, a staggering 14-point drop in six months. Starmer, once seen as unflappable, is now criticised for being distant, indecisive, and disconnected from his MPs.
His senior adviser Morgan McSweeney has come under fire for fostering a “bunker mentality” in Downing Street and for allegedly proposing to suspend dozens of rebellious MPs. Though not yet a full-blown leadership crisis, murmurs of succession are growing. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, and Labour chair Shabana Mahmood are all seen as potential successors.
Meanwhile, critics inside and outside the party say Labour’s woes stem not from ideology but poor political judgment. Key reforms were mishandled, and messaging was often framed as austerity rather than opportunity.
For now, Labour remains in office, but no longer firmly in control of its destiny. The biggest challenge ahead? Turning a mandate for change into a government that can hold itself together long enough to deliver it.
COMMUNITY VOICES
According to Trupti Patel, President of Hindu Forum of Britain (HFB), the Prime Minister is still finding his feet, dealing with issues that have either newly arisen or been sitting on the back burner for years and are now coming to the forefront.
As the leader of an apolitical organisation with experience working across party lines, she reflected on the Prime Minister’s first year in office, saying, “One of the most pressing concerns remains the promise to stop illegal immigration via small boats, which hasn’t progressed much. That’s proving to be a serious challenge. On the other hand, there are some areas where the government has made steady progress. For instance, the development of Martyn’s Law under the Terrorism Protection Act is particularly important for our community.
“There’s also been movement on other fronts: the assisted dying bill, bail reforms, and committee discussions on protecting women, girls, and vulnerable adults. Just a few days ago, we witnessed serious discussions and decisive actions being taken on the issue of grooming gangs, which shows the machinery of government is still at work. It’s heartening that these issues haven’t been abandoned.”
The HFB president feels that it’s now vital the Prime Minister shows strong leadership and ensures both justice for the victims and a deeper cultural shift. “It’s still early, just the first year, so it’s hard to judge. Promises are easy to make, but delivery is a different matter”, she said.
Outlining the expectations of the British-Hindu community, she said, “Our community is integration-minded, committed to cohesion, and we have contributed immensely to British society. However, we are very clear on three things: we will not tolerate Hindu hate; we want equal treatment in schemes like the Places of Worship Protection Fund; and we expect consistent application of hate crime protections across all communities.
“Moving forward, as a faith community, we want to see true equality in practice. The laws are in place, we just want to ensure they are applied fairly. You can quote me on that.”
About the immigration debate, she feels that the country needs migrants across all sectors. “If you remove Indian-origin doctors and nurses from the NHS, or Indian-origin technicians the system simply wouldn’t function. The same is true of the IT sector and the education and digital training sectors—Indians have played a crucial role and these contributions are not limited to one nationality.
“The key is that those who come here should integrate into the fabric of British society. What people are rightfully concerned about are those who enter under the guise of asylum but exploit the system, draining public resources and tax contributions meant for genuine needs.”
Finally, discussing what the Prime Minister’s priority should be when it comes to minority communities, she said, “One year into the Labour government, we recognise some encouraging continuity in policy work, but should remain cautious. We cannot support selective recognition or positive discrimination. Everyone should progress on merit, and hate crimes against all communities must be recorded and addressed equally. True equality must be reflected in both policy and practice. The Prime Minister must focus on treating every community fairly, including South Asians, and ensuring protections and opportunities are applied consistently. At the end of the day, governments must deliver policies that serve all people, not just some.”
Dr Wajid Akhtar, the Secretary General, Muslim Council of Britain shares what the community expected for the new government when it came into power last year saying, “When the Labour government came into power, we hoped they would genuinely listen to the concerns of our community, as well as others, particularly regarding the war in Gaza.
“What is happening there, which we consider a genocide, was and remains a critical issue for many of us. We expected the new government to make an effort to build bridges, engage with our concerns, and work collaboratively to push for a ceasefire and an end to the violence and we still expect the same.”
Asked about the afar-right sentiment that targeted the community last year and if he found the government’s reaction appropriate, he said, “I think the Prime Minister handled the riots well. The response was swift; law enforcement acted quickly, pushed back against the rioters, and helped restore order. From a policing and law-and-order perspective, they did a good job.
“However, the deeper issue of Islamophobia was not adequately addressed. Simply calling out the violence isn't enough. Unless the root causes are acknowledged and tackled, the problem will persist.”
He further added, “Islamophobia is not limited to Muslims and it's important to highlight that Hindus, Sikhs, and even Filipinos have been affected because attackers don’t distinguish between communities. They target people simply based on appearance or ethnicity. For example, the tragic killing of Bhim Kohli, an elderly Hindu man, is a stark reminder of how far-reaching and misdirected hatred can be.
“This is our main point: you cannot address a systemic problem by treating isolated incidents. You have to confront the root cause directly. Unfortunately, what we’re seeing some elements in the Parliament, week after week, starting debates about burqas, halal meat, and other cultural issues to perpetuate a narrative that paints entire communities as problematic.
“Yes, where there is criminality, it must be addressed with the full force of the law. No one disagrees with that. But when the majority is vilified because of a small criminal minority, it creates a toxic environment. That’s what fuels real-world hate and violence, and that’s what must be stopped.”
According to Dr Akhtar, the British-Muslim community wants Keir Starmer to give the same kind of attention to Gaza as he prioritises Ukraine ad Zelensky. He said, “For nearly two years, we've asked for nothing more than a ceasefire and an end to complicity.
“We know our government doesn’t have the power to stop the war directly. But when countries like Spain and Norway have stood up to say, “We recognise Palestine,” and demand an end to the violence, why can’t the UK do the same?
“Instead, there is growing evidence of our governments complicity in the genocide. We as a community are left helpless. We march in the streets, we're labelled hate-mongers. We write letters, they're ignored. We boycott, and we’re investigated.
“Aside from Gaza, the impact of some of labours policies including changes to PIP, assisted dying and more will have a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable of society."
DOMESTIC POLICY AND IMPACT
John Curtice, a British political scientist and professor of politics at the University of Strathclyde, said, “Politically, Labour’s first year hasn’t been particularly successful. It’s suffered the sharpest drop in public support of any newly elected British government, despite starting with just 35% of the vote, the lowest ever for a majority government. Voters still aren’t sure what the government stands for, and Keir Starmer was never fully embraced by the public. Governing, as we’re seeing, is far more exposing than opposition.
The government inherited a difficult economic and health landscape, and while they’ve set out credible long-term goals, progress has been slow. Growth remains weak, and NHS productivity is still below pre-pandemic levels. Whether they prepared the public adequately for the scale of the challenge is unclear.
Looking ahead, the political landscape is volatile. The rise of Reform reflects a broader fragmentation of British politics. You don’t need to perform brilliantly to be electorally competitive, but small shifts could have big consequences. Long-term infrastructure investment may help in the 2030s, but it won’t deliver quick wins by 2029. And much lies beyond their control—Trump, tariffs, wars, global economic shocks.
So, good luck to them. The road ahead is uncertain, not just for Labour, but for anyone seeking to lead Britain through this complex period.”
Dr Colm Murphy, Lecturer in British Politics at Queen Mary University of London focusing on domestic politics, said, "There are some successes from the Labour point of view, notably progress on boosting workers' rights, public sector wage rises, and rail renationalisation. The government also managed to boost long-term investments in renewables, nuclear energy, and social housing. But the government has found the going tough, and not just in foreign policy, where it has struggled to adjust quickly enough to catastrophic developments in the Middle East. Domestically, it is now grappling with rebellions over welfare cuts, and it also struggles with discontent on the right over immigration and from business over tax rises.
“Partly, this is as expected given the ugly legacies of austerity, the pandemic, and Brexit: low growth, a rising tax burden, a spike in net immigration, underperforming public services, and decaying public infrastructure. Any government would find this situation challenging. It is also not that surprising that the public have soured on the government so quickly - UK voters are now generally less attached to parties than they used to be, and the media landscape is fragmented and angry.
“What is surprising is that the government clearly underestimated these challenges. They did not appear to have a backup tax and spend plan in the event that economic growth did not increase, leading them into hasty cuts that backfired politically. Also surprising is No 10's combination of unclear messaging and a disciplinarian approach to its parliamentary party, which was an accident waiting to happen.
“The best thing the government can do for re-election at this stage is to stop thinking in terms of short-term electoral benefit: the election is still four years away. Instead, it needs to resolve the tensions within its strategy (notably on tax versus public investment), increasing the chance of policy success, and then persistently push their re-founded strategy in as many outlets as possible."
Dr Patrick Diamond, Professor of Public Policy, School of Politics and International Relations (SPIR), Queen Mary, University of London commented on the extent to which the government delivered on its promises. He said, “So far, Labour hasn't been able to deliver on its commitments. There is some evidence of improvement in NHS waiting times in the 12 months since Labour came to power, but no dramatic transformation. The government's options are limited because without additional economic growth, it will be hard to get more money into public services and improving growth is hard because there are significant global headwinds and volatility in the world economy which impacts on the UK. Moreover, the UK is still suffering the effects of Brexit.”
Evaluating Labour’s approach to reforming institutions like the NHS, civil service, and local government, he said, “Labour came to power but in lots of areas it did not have well developed reform proposals, so its approach to the reform of institutions has been limited so far. It is doing significant reform in the NHS by scrapping NHS England, although it isn't clear what model will replace the old organisation.
“In local government, there are plans to devolve more power and merge local authorities. The changes will be important but not ground-breaking. It has been similarly cautious so far in its approach to the civil service. This is not a government that feels a strong commitment to institutional reform but rather seems content to try to achieve modest improvements that make life better for citizens.”
EDUCATION POLICY
Focusing on education policy, Natalie Perera, the Education Policy Institute's Chief Executive, said: "The Labour government has made some positive strides in education, notably ending single-word Ofsted judgements, appointing Professor Becky Francis to lead the curriculum and assessment review, and introducing new measures in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, including a single unique identifier for all children and a compulsory register for children not in school. However, the challenges facing our education system and children's wellbeing require this government to go further and faster.
"The impacts of austerity, the cost-of-living crisis, and rising child poverty have significantly hampered educational progress. We have lost a decade of progress in closing the gap between the most disadvantaged pupils and their peers, and we are seeing increasing numbers of young people leaving education entirely at 16.
"The government's recent spending review, while offering a cash increase, still falls short when accounting for inflation and existing commitments, leaving little flexibility for schools to meet rising needs.
"Tackling child poverty must be front and centre on the government's agenda. The government has already delayed plans to publish its child poverty strategy, but this cannot wait any longer. Implementing targeted funding for persistently disadvantaged children and prioritising resources for special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) are crucial next steps.
"With four years remaining before the next election, Labour still has a meaningful window to create positive and impactful change for children and young people. However, it needs to take decisive action on challenging issues such as welfare and the distribution of funding if we are going to see better outcomes for all children and young people, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds."
FOREIGN POLICY
Dr Chietigj Bajpaee, Senior Research Fellow for South Asia, Asia-Pacific Programme at Chatham House, commented Labour government’s foreign policy compared to its Conservative predecessor, particularly in relation to India, stating:
“Continuity and change have characterised the Labour government’s foreign policy towards India. Continuity has been evident in the government’s effort to build on progress made by previous Conservative administrations. This has been noted by the conclusion of the free trade agreement with India, which began under the previous Conservative government. Similarly, the UK-India Comprehensive Strategic Partnership builds on the previous 2030 roadmap.
“Change has been evident in the government’s efforts to shed allegations of an anti-India bias within the Labour Party. The conclusion of the FTA; launch of the Technology Security Initiative with India; Southampton University becoming the first UK university to establish a campus inside India; and even more symbolic actions, such as David Lammy visiting India in his first month as foreign secretary and Keir Starmer’s likely visit to India later this year all demonstrate the priority that the Labour government attaches towards deepening relations with India
On Labour’s foreign policy vision, he said, “The recent Strategic Defence Review, China audit and other initiatives show efforts to adopt a more strategic approach. But balancing long-term goals with short-term shocks and political pressures is difficult. Fiscal constraints, pressure from the Trump administration to boost NATO spending, and threats from Russia and Middle East instability have forced cuts in areas like overseas aid. These pressures also limit the UK’s ability to focus on regions like the Indo-Pacific. This raises questions about the sustainability of the UK’s ‘tilt’ towards the region, including deeper engagement with India.”
NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
Dr Ramesh Mehta OBE, Founder of BAPIO said, “As the NHS turns 77, we must acknowledge that while its founding principle of free care at the point of need still holds immense value, growing bureaucracy and poor management have eroded its effectiveness. Long waits and delays in emergency care are unacceptable and must be addressed urgently.
“South Asian doctors and managers have contributed immensely for decades, it’s time NHS leadership truly reflects the diversity of its workforce and the communities it serves. We must break down the ‘white peaks’ at the top if we want better outcomes for both staff and patients.
“Despite these challenges, the NHS remains one of the finest healthcare systems in the world.”
