Keir Starmer’s first 100 days as Labour leader mixed precision with lack of policy

In May, new Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was asked about the ongoing land dispute of Kashmir. The semi-autonomous zone between India and Pakistan had been practically stripped of its self-determination status under the command of a hard right and nationalist Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi. Starmer, a fresh-faced successor to Jeremy Corbyn’s tenure, proclaimed the Kashmir issue a “bilateral” one.

This proclamation, often unnoticed but crucial, defines the trajectory of the Labour party under Starmer’s first 100 days since becoming leader. Corbyn, a lifelong and diplomatic advocate for peace and supporter of the underdog, stood in solidarity with Kashmir. To mark such a dynamic shift, Starmer seems hellbent on dismantling the party’s former years.

The first 100 days of a new Leader of the Opposition are significant. This one has entailed precision and trustworthiness but also a lack of clarity and direction for the Labour party. Starmer fans have claimed that he is focusing on national calm whilst the country lives through a public health pandemic, labelling his stand a “masterclass”. Others, sceptical of his position, say he isn’t doing enough to fervently oppose the government’s lacklustre response to the crisis and that “he isn’t taking a stance on anything”.

Whilst Labour supporters spar over if he is best fit for the position, the wider electorate have a more appealing take on his leadership. Polls throughout his first 100 days showed that 52 percent of voters could imagine him in Number 10. This overtook or matched Boris Johnson’s approval ratings, affirming the new Labour leader as one that could be electable. His measured and forensic approach to an international calamity has given voters a sense that Starmer has what it takes.

Whilst he soars in the polls, his unambiguous territory on policy in a factional Labour party have left his socialist colleagues frustrated. Starmer campaigned on a progressive manifesto that proposed public ownership of key services, the abolition of tuition fees and a green industrial revolution to overcome the climate crisis. All these policy tenets were overwhelmingly popular with Labour members and were heralded by Jeremy Corbyn throughout his term. But what is confusing is Starmer’s favourable view of soft left and Blairite parliamentarians who he’s appointed in senior positions.

The New Labour years under Tony Blair denounced any progressive and socialist manifesto that wanted to rid the status quo. However, Blair’s appeasers in the Labour party today have backed Starmer and are encouraged to work with him. This act of unity, completely lost under Corbyn, is healthy but certainly questionable. If Starmer placates the centrists of the Labour party, he could jeopardise his leadership with an exodus on the left. So not to offend both, he treads carefully and refuses to call for policy measures before the 2024 election. Those radical policies, from the tax on wealth to a net-zero carbon target by 2030, have been side-lined to the dismay of the Labour left.

Although promising unity and the end of factionalism, what many will remember about Starmer’s first 100 days, is his sacking of former leadership opponent Rebecca Long-Bailey. The newly-appointed shadow education secretary, a Corbynite and socialist proponent, was accused of spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories via an article shared on Twitter. The cause of concern on antisemitism has always been aligned with the hard left. The Corbyn years were an era of heightened antisemitism, according to his critics, and a purge of the left was wished upon by the anti-Corbyn wing of the party. Starmer’s decisive sacking of Long-Bailey was his way of wooing Jewish voters and Corbynsceptics who felt marginalised before.

To examine Starmer’s first 100 days in office, considering it either a failure or a success would not be surprising. In the midst of Covid-19, Starmer has not been able to showcase his full view on crucial everyday issues. Whilst this pandemic continues to unfold, an enigmatic Starmer can continue to lead by example but ignore calls for more clarity.