During a tetchy exchange at prime minister’s questions this week, Keir Starmer was challenged by Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, over a petition signed by more than 2.8 million people calling for him to resign.
“She talks about a petition – we had a massive petition on 4 July in this country,” he said in response. But most in Downing Street will acknowledge that, less than five months since Labour’s election landslide, the party has had a bumpier start than it had hoped.
Sources say that in recent weeks the mood inside No 10 has, nevertheless, lifted. There has been, since the departure of Sue Gray as chief of staff and her replacement by Morgan McSweeney, significantly less friction and a greater sense of direction.
Yet externally, there is no denying that things have been rocky, and recent rows over the budget with groups including employers and farmers, as well as constant online attacks by Elon Musk, have threatened to overshadow the government’s plans on an almost daily basis.
Starmer’s team has spent much of its time since last month’s budget on the defensive. It has made some Labour MPs jittery. “We spent years courting pensioners, farmers and small businesses – yet seem to have spent the last few months turning them against us,” said one.
Others believe the backlash is the inevitable consequence of a budget in which taxes were put up by £40bn. “Either we did nothing, we fudged it, or we made tough decisions,” said one aide. “We didn’t see any alternative to doing the difficult stuff now.”
But beyond the firefighting is a more profound concern: that the public still does not really understand what the new government wants to achieve before the next election. “We need to tell a better story” is a constant refrain from those in and around No 10.
McSweeney is the man tasked with coming up with a solution and, true to form, it is prosaic. “Morgan knows our best chance of holding off a populist surge, and winning Keir a second term, is delivering noticeable change to voters,” said one ally. “It’s as simple as that.”
“We do need to tell a proper story about what this country will look like at the time of the next election, but ultimately delivery is fundamental,” another said.
So next Thursday, the prime minister will make a major speech to mark the publication of his “plan for change”: setting out targets for delivery in half a dozen priority areas by the end of this parliament.
Perhaps inevitably, this will lead to claims that Starmer’s five missions – the broad policy programmes that underpinned his approach to government – are being dumped. Some of his closest supporters worry that the strategy could undermine him.
No 10 insiders, however, argue the numerical targets are a necessary recognition that the missions were too conceptual for most people. “We’ll be putting them into layman’s terms,” said one insider.
Just before the election was called, Starmer set out his first steps to achieving the missions: specific targets in areas like teacher recruitment and NHS waiting lists. Some of the missions themselves were based around a 10-year plan, rather than the five-year electoral cycle.
“There was always this unanswered question: you’ve got the first steps in the short term, the missions for the long term – what comes in between?” said one aide. Next week’s announcement is the answer.
McSweeney, perhaps conscious of mistrust in politics more generally, wants an emphasis on transparency, with progress on targets “put up in lights” so the public can track them over the course of the parliament.
He plans to draw on – and expand – a No 10 data gathering operation that was originally set up by Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s controversial senior aide, but then put on ice when he left government.
The most significant of the new targets will be around improving living standards, with a pledge to increase real disposable income. It will be no easy task: the forecast for the current parliament suggests that it will be the second worst on record for household income growth.
Another will be Labour’s pledge to build 1.5m homes over the course of the parliament. The housing minister has already admitted it is an “incredibly stretching target”. But No 10 is philosophical. “Yes, we might not hit it, but if we even get close people will still see a big difference.”
With border security regularly cited in polling as a voter priority, along with the NHS and the economy, there has also been internal discussions over targets on irregular and legal migration.
However, sources suggested No 10 may have decided against a target for such an unpredictable policy area. Starmer on Thursday ruled out an immigration cap as “arbitrary” and said the government would drive down numbers “without gimmicks”.
Other priorities will be more familiar: NHS waiting lists, childcare, clean energy and cutting crime. McSweeney is said to be reconciled to the political risk involved in setting targets. “Just trying to reach them stretches us, and if we get close then there’s still a good story to tell,” one ally said.
Internal No 10 research indicates that those voters who backed Labour in July’s general election, and who it needs to retain to win next time, are still willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt. For now.
But Labour party strategists know they will soon expect to see the change they voted for. “We have to focus on things we can achieve and deliver, rather than being battered around by the polls.”
Some Labour figures close to Starmer are worried that McSweeney is too focused on the next general election, telling the Guardian they fear there is not enough emphasis on what the government has to do in the meantime.
But allies defended him, insisting the two are irrevocably linked. One said: “The whole point is that you’re judged at the election on what you do in the years running up it. Of course he thinks about the argument we want to be making when we get there.”
