A New Kind of British Cabinet Faces a Familiar Problem: Perception

With fewer members educated in elite private schools, the government represents a shift in the country’s political landscape. Key figures in Starmer’s administration have stories that are far removed from the elite upbringing often associated with the British cabinet.

Take Angela Rayner, Britain’s current deputy prime minister, for instance. She grew up in a home where hot water was considered a luxury, and financial hardship was a constant companion.

Wes Streeting, the health secretary, was raised by a single mother who struggled to make ends meet, even pawning her jewellery to pay bills. David Lammy, the foreign secretary, grew up in a deprived part of north London, where he faced racist abuse in the streets.

Their personal journeys underscore a shared experience of overcoming adversity, something not often seen in Britain’s political elite.

Starmer himself isn’t immune to such hardships. His father worked in a factory, and he has recounted stories of financial struggle, such as the family’s phone service being disconnected because they couldn’t afford to pay the bill.

Such backgrounds suggest a government more in touch with ordinary Britons than those who have governed the country in recent memory. In fact, of the 22 members of Starmer’s cabinet, only one attended a private school, a rarity in British politics where top ministers have historically been products of exclusive institutions like Eton or Harrow.

The electorate aren’t buying it.

Yet despite the working-class origins of many in Starmer’s cabinet, public perception is surprisingly out of step with the reality of their backgrounds.

A recent opinion poll showed that fewer than one in four Britons believe the Labour government, which came to power in July, cares about “people like them.”

On the other hand, nearly two-thirds of voters see the government as detached from the concerns of ordinary citizens.

This gap between the social origins of top ministers and how they are perceived by the public highlights a deeper issue of disillusionment with the political class.

In Britain, as in many other democracies, voters are increasingly skeptical of politicians, regardless of their background.

Years of political scandals, economic instability, and public dissatisfaction with governance have eroded trust. Starmer’s Labour government, despite its unique makeup, has not been immune to this broader trend.

One factor contributing to the disconnect is the recent scandal involving free gifts accepted by senior Labour figures.

Among the revelations were items like clothing and eyeglasses gifted to Prime Minister Starmer, as well as dresses provided to his wife by party donors. These revelations were seized upon by Britain’s right-leaning media, painting a picture of hypocrisy.

To many voters, such benefits, while common in political circles, signal a lifestyle of privilege at odds with the working-class credentials that ministers like Starmer and Rayner have highlighted.

Professor Sam Friedman, an expert on social mobility and inequality, explains that while Labour’s ministers have emphasized their working-class roots as a way to relate to the public, the “freebie scandal” has undercut this narrative.

“Free clothes, free tickets, free parties paid for, the use of expensive apartments when they need them — all this signals a life of privilege, not ordinariness,” he said. The scandal has given ammunition to critics who argue that Labour, despite its rhetoric, is not as in touch with ordinary people as it claims to be.

The perception problem Labour faces is one of authenticity. While the backgrounds of Starmer’s ministers may be humble, the privileges that come with high office are often viewed through a lens of suspicion. Voters see ministers benefiting from their positions in ways that ordinary people cannot, reinforcing a long-held cynicism about politicians and power.

This cynicism is compounded by a political landscape where wealth, status, and privilege often seem inseparable from governance, even when those in charge come from less advantaged backgrounds.

Britain is no stranger to class politics, and Labour has traditionally positioned itself as the party of the working class. However, the modern political environment is more complex.

Identity politics, economic inequality, and public disenchantment with elites have created a volatile mix. Voters want leaders who understand their struggles, but they are also quick to reject those who appear to benefit from the privileges of office, regardless of their origins.

The challenge for Starmer and his cabinet is to reconcile their working-class stories with the realities of life at the top. The “freebie scandal” has exposed the fine line politicians must walk between authenticity and privilege.

To regain the trust of the electorate, Labour will need to do more than tell stories of humble beginnings; it must also demonstrate that it remains connected to the concerns of everyday people, not just in rhetoric, but in action.

Ultimately, Britain’s current government may be more working-class than any in recent history, but it is navigating a political landscape where perception often matters more than reality.

The challenge for Starmer’s team is to ensure that their governance reflects the values they claim to represent — and to close the gap between how they are perceived and who they really are.

Main Image: Public Domain, via https://x.com/Mofoman360/status/1840687343209951436/photo/1