Does Britain still need the Labour Party? This question resonates deeply as the party grapples with an identity crisis and struggles to maintain relevance in a rapidly changing political landscape.
Once a formidable force for working-class representation and social justice, Labour’s trajectory has been marked by both achievements and controversies, leaving many to question its purpose today.
A Troubled Legacy: Wilson, Callaghan, and Economic Turmoil
Labour’s leadership during the 1970s under Harold Wilson and James Callaghan was a tumultuous period marked by economic crises and industrial unrest. Britain faced soaring inflation, stagnant growth, and mounting unemployment.
The nadir came in 1976 when the Callaghan government was humiliatingly forced to seek a £3.9 billion (approximately £35.47 billion today). loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – the largest loan even given from the IMF at the time – in order to stabilise Britain’s economy.
The IMF’s stringent conditions required severe public spending cuts, alienating Labour’s traditional supporters and exposing deep divisions within the party.
Simultaneously, widespread industrial action, epitomised by the infamous “Winter of Discontent” in 1978-79, paralyzed the nation.
Strikes by public sector workers demanding higher wages led to uncollected rubbish piling up on streets and graveyards closing, creating a powerful image of governmental failure. These events contributed to Labour’s landslide defeat in 1979 and the rise of Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative revolution.
The Blair Years: War and Division
Labour’s revival under Tony Blair in the 1990s marked a significant ideological shift. Blair’s “New Labour” embraced market-friendly policies, shedding much of the party’s socialist legacy. While this repositioning won three consecutive general elections, it came at a cost.
Blair’s tenure is most remembered for Britain’s involvement in controversial wars, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. The decision to join the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, based on disputed intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, sparked widespread protests and left a lasting stain on Labour’s reputation.
These foreign policy missteps alienated many traditional Labour voters, who felt the party had strayed too far from its roots. Blair’s focus on middle-class concerns and his perceived closeness to corporate interests further deepened this rift, leaving the party struggling to reconcile its historical mission with its modern ambitions.
Starmer’s Struggles and Public Dissatisfaction
Today, Labour under Keir Starmer faces a crisis of leadership and vision. Starmer, who succeeded the far-left Jeremy Corbyn in 2020, initially promised to unify the party and restore its electability.
However, his tenure has been marked by a lack of clear direction and uninspiring rhetoric, and within four months of his entering 10 Downing Street a petition calling call for a second General Election garnered more than 3 million signatures.
According to an IPSOS poll, dissatisfaction with Starmer has reached 61%, the highest level since he became leader.
This growing discontent reflects a broader frustration with Labour’s inability to present a compelling alternative to the Conservative government.
Economic optimism among the British public continues to deteriorate. Two-thirds (65%) of people expect the economy to worsen over the next year, the worst score since late 2022.
In these dire conditions, Labour has struggled to capitalise on public discontent, with Starmer often criticised for his cautious approach and failure to articulate bold policies.
Scandal and Erosion of Integrity
Adding to Labour’s woes is the scandal surrounding Tulip Siddiq, a prominent MP who was forced to resign after facing allegations of corruption. This controversy is particularly damaging given Labour’s historical commitment to fighting inequality and corruption. Siddiq’s resignation underscores a broader perception of Labour as a party that has lost its moral compass, further alienating voters seeking principled leadership.
Further compounding this perception are allegations of past associations between Labour figures and the Soviet Union.
Labour MP Fenner Brockway was accused of being a KGB “asset,” an allegation that continues to cast a shadow over the party’s historical record.
Former Deputy Head of KGB in London, Oleg Gordievsky, alleged that Brockway had been a “confidential contact” of the KGB and had “accepted a great deal of hospitality from Soviet intelligence”.
Similarly, Bob Edwards, a Labour Member of the European Parliament, reportedly received a medal from KGB officer Leonid Zaitsev in his Brussels office.
“So highly did the KGB value him that he was awarded the Order of the People’s Friendship, the country’s third highest decoration.
“The medal was kept in his file at the Centre, but Zaitsev once took it with him to Brussels, so that the recipient could at least see and touch what he had won,” Gordievsky wrote in his memoir Next Stop Execution.
These incidents continue to fuel criticisms about the party’s susceptibility to external influences, undermining its credibility in advocating for transparency and integrity.
The Loss of Traditional Labour Values
Labour’s decline also reflects a broader departure from the values that once defined the party. Figures like Keir Hardie, the party’s founder, championed the rights of workers and the poor, laying the groundwork for Labour’s mission to create a fairer society.
Dr. Alfred Salter, a pioneering socialist and public health advocate, exemplified Labour’s commitment to grassroots activism and social justice. Bob Mellish, the “dockers’ MP,” tirelessly represented the interests of working-class communities.
Today, many lament the erosion of these values. Labour’s focus on identity politics and technocratic governance has alienated traditional supporters who feel the party no longer represents their interests. The disconnect between Labour’s leadership and its base is stark, with many questioning whether the party can still claim to be the voice of the working class.
A Party led by “Former” Student Activists
Many members of Keir Starmer’s frontbench team trace their political roots to activism, with causes ranging from nuclear disarmament and gay rights to Black Lives Matter and Palestinian advocacy. This legacy of activism continues to shape political debates in the United Kingdom, as evidenced by recent developments involving high-profile protests.

Keir Starmer: Even his own current activists want him out!
One such demonstration took place as recently as Saturday, January 18th, in Central London, organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC).
PSC Leaders have had apparent ties with Hamas or have expressed sympathy for its views, the Jewish Chronicle has reported.
Among the attendees was Piers Corbyn, a 77-year-old activist and brother of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Piers Corbyn, a former Southwark councillor and a well-known figure in activist circles, now faces charges related to a public order offence stemming from the event.
The Metropolitan Police stated that conditions were imposed on the protest to ensure public safety and order. Organizers had agreed that the demonstration would remain static in Whitehall, rather than proceeding as a march. However, tensions rose, and the event culminated in over 70 arrests, including Piers Corbyn. His involvement adds another chapter to his history of controversial activism.
Jeremy Corbyn, a longtime advocate for Palestinian rights and a familiar presence at similar events, also attended the protest.
According to reports from the BBC, he agreed to be interviewed under caution by police regarding his participation. His involvement underscores the deep connections between his political career and his support for this cause, which has been a consistent aspect of his public life.
This protest and the subsequent arrests highlight the broader challenges faced by political movements advocating for contentious issues. While the demonstration showcased solidarity with Palestine, it also underscored the difficulties of balancing activism with public order.
The presence of prominent figures like the Corbyn brothers brings additional attention to the intersection of activism and politics. As the legal proceedings unfold, the case will likely reignite discussions about the role of political activism in shaping public discourse and its limits within the framework of law and order.
Keir Starmer’s Labour Party appears unable to distance itself from such events.
A Party at a Crossroads
The question of whether Britain still needs the Labour Party is complex, but does warrant examination. Labour’s historical achievements in advancing workers’ rights, establishing the welfare state, and promoting social justice cannot be understated.
However, the party’s recent history of economic mismanagement, controversial wars, weak leadership, and ethical scandals has eroded public trust.
As economic optimism plummets and dissatisfaction with Starmer’s leadership grows, Labour faces an existential challenge. To remain relevant, the party must reconnect with its traditional values and articulate a bold vision for the future.
Without this renewal, Labour risks becoming a relic of the past, destined to go the way of the Whig Party (dissolved in 1859) or the Liberal Party, once considered by many as the natural party of governance, but unable to form a majority government since before the First World War.
Main Image: UK Parliament, via Wikipedia.