Nothing impresses him. Neither ministerial crises nor electoral humiliations. In London, the only one whose ability to survive Keir Starmer’s reign politically is called Larry. The cat at 10 Downing Street, installed since 2011, has already seen five British Prime Ministers pass through. Although Larry clings to power, Larry, impassive, already seems to be waiting for his successor on the steps of the famous black door.
The British political tradition is cruel: Prime Ministers do not fall prey to the opposition. They are brought down by their own people. Keir Starmer has been experiencing this for ten days. Three members of his cabinet resigned. Leader of the rebels, Wes Streeting, Minister of Health, slammed the door on Thursday in a letter resembling an announcement: “Where vision is needed, there is a void. Where direction is needed, there is a drift. »
Since Labour’s historic defeat in the local elections on May 7, more than 90 Labor MPs have publicly called for the resignation of their own Prime Minister. Starmer, for his part, stands firm, invoking the party’s rules: only a formal procedure can force him to leave. But no one has triggered it yet. As if in denial, he repeats that a change of leader would plunge the country into the same “chaos” as that of the conservatives.
The Speech from the Throne on Tuesday was supposed to revive the Labor machine. Before Charles III, he only exposed his state of disrepair. Not a word on social assistance reform, while the number of beneficiaries of Universal Credit, the political symbol of welfare in Great Britain, threatens to reach ten million by the end of the decade. For any program, disparate measures: a tax on holidays in Britain, plans to abolish the popular jury in certain trials, and the Miliband law on energy independence, which bans all new drilling in the North Sea.
To hope to overthrow Starmer, his opponents must, however, gather the support of a fifth of Labor MPs, or 81 elected, in order to trigger the protest procedure. A threshold that is still distant: the parliamentarians who called for the departure of the Prime Minister form a heterogeneous bloc, united more by a wind of panic than by the choice of a successor. Because Labour’s problem is not so much Starmer as what looms behind him. They all share the same fear: to sink with him.
Which successor?
Let’s look at the candidates. Angela Rayner, first. The former Deputy Prime Minister had to leave the government in September 2025 after a real estate scandal: accused of having defrauded the tax authorities during the purchase of an apartment in Hove, a seaside resort not far from Brighton, she admitted the error before resigning. On Thursday, the tax authorities cleared her of any intentional fraud. At the same time, she assured that she did not want to “start” a rebellion against Starmer, while taking care not to close any doors.
Labor MPs have the same fear:
flow with him
Another name going around: Andy Burnham. The mayor of Greater Manchester, nicknamed the “King of the North”, embodies a grassroots policy, close to the working classes. He is also the only major Labor official to remain somewhat appreciated: 35% of British people have a positive opinion of him while only 19% say the same thing about the Prime Minister. Problem: he is no longer an MP. On Thursday, the situation was resolved: Josh Simons, elected from Makerfield, gave up his seat. Burnham does not have to leave town hall before the vote – set for June 18 – and would only resign if he wins. A defeat, on the other hand, would be enough to bury his ambitions. Nigel Farage immediately promised to “put all his strength into it”; in this constituency, Reform won 50% of the votes in the local elections.
As for Streeting, with 16% positive opinions, the man who wants to bring down the Prime Minister is almost as unpopular as him. That leaves Ed Miliband, already defeated in 2015 – a stopgap, say his own allies, while waiting for Burnham. This is Labor in 2026: a leader who refuses to leave and successors that no one really wants.
In Westminster, the word “Starmergeddon” has also changed its definition. For months, the Conservatives used it to describe the apocalypse supposed to befall the United Kingdom with Starmer. Now, it is Labor itself which uses the term to designate the catastrophe which threatens its existence. The suspense in London is no longer really about Starmer’s fall, but about the time he has left before going through the black door under Larry’s blasé gaze.
