If Keir Starmer has had one success, it’s killing democracy in the Labour Party. Following the latest reshuffle, it’s clear that Starmer has no intention of tolerating dissent, even though his MPs clearly have a better read of the public mood than him – and his head honcho Morgan McSweeney:
Labour source points out that the government whips office now contains the wife of Morgan McSweeney, the No10 chief of staff, and the husband and brother of Amy Richards, No10’s new political director.
“I’m sure that will reassure the PLP,” the source says.
— Kevin Schofield (@KevinASchofield) September 8, 2025
A Morgan McSweeney family affair
As described by the Institute for Government:
Whips are MPs and peers affiliated to a political party appointed to ensure their party colleagues vote according to the leader’s agenda
Reading that, you might think a bit of Morgan McSweeney-style nepotism is actually the most sensible means of whipping the party into shape. After all, it’s going to feel pretty awkward slagging off the abysmal operation in Number 10 when you’re talking to one of the abysmal operators’ wives.
The first problem for Starmer is that Britain is superficially dedicated to democracy and meritocracy. Can Starmer pretend to be in favour of either of those things when he’s employing the spouses of his meritless lackeys to enforce his ill-thought out bidding?
The second problem for Starmer is that everyone knows he’s becoming increasingly authoritarian because his rank incompetence and public unpopularity demand it. A key example of this was Starmer’s recent attempt to gut benefits for sick and disabled people. Because the plan was blatantly cruel and demonstrably at odds with why people voted Labour, it was wildly unpopular with the public. Many Labour MPs picked up how unpopular the cuts would be, and whether or not they actually cared about their constituents, they did take a stand against the government.
The climb down
As a result of the rebellion, Starmer was forced to climb down. This was embarrassing for Labour, but ultimately it was less of a clusterfuck than it would have been if they’d actually succeeded in forcing the cuts through.
Instead of reflecting on his dreadful instincts and lacking humanity, Starmer quietly seethed for a few weeks then suspended four key rebels. Starmer justified the suspensions as follows:
I am determined we will change this country for the better for millions of working people – and I’m not going to be deflected from that.
Therefore, we have to deal with people who repeatedly break the whip.
Everyone was elected as a Labour on a Labour manifesto of change and everybody needs to deliver as a Labour government.
The word ‘change’ is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
Yes, it’s unarguable that the British public wanted change; it’s equally clear that Starmer’s election campaign revolved around monotonously repeating the word ‘change’ like a busted chatbot.
It’s equally clear, however, that the people implicitly understood ‘change’ to mean ‘change for the better’; not ‘change for the worse’.
What goes around
You could make the case that the previous Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was too soft on MPs. He sought to strengthen democracy wherever he could, and his MPs repaid him by stabbing him the back at best and stabbing him in the front more often.
Now, the same MPs who shat and pissed at the thought of re-nationalising the NHS are upset because they’re being bullied into torching their careers by a political idiot.
What a shame.
The problem Corbyn faced wasn’t that democracy doesn’t work; it was that it’s too late to reintroduce it to the Labour Party. At this point, Labour is really just three lobbyists in a trench coat.
These people were never going to disembark the gravy train of their own free will, but it’s good that Corbyn attempted it, because now we can all see that the concept of ‘Labour democracy’ is an oxymoron.
Once again, real democracy must be built from the ground up.
This time, let’s try not to let the sell outs take it over.
Featured image via BBC (re-upload)
