The Starmer Project: A journey to the Right

by Oliver Eagleton

The Labour Party has virtually disappeared from view under the leadership of Keir Starmer. Hailed as a human-rights champion and political outsider, what sort of politician is he really, and what mark is he making on the new politics of Labour?



In The Starmer Project, Oliver Eagleton provides a careful reading of Starmer's record at the Crown Prosecution Service and as a member of Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, tracing the political alliances he forged and the roots of his bid for the Party leadership.



Starmer originally pledged to revitalise Corbynism with a dose of lawyerly competence. To understand what happened afterwards it is necessary to understand the man himself. So little remains known about Starmer that his actions are usually interpreted as overtures to others. On closer inspection, however, he is anything but an empty political vessel.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Biography, British Literature, History

224 pages, Paperback

First published April 26, 2022

About the author

Oliver Eagleton is an Assistant Editor at New Left Review and Sidecar. He writes on culture and politics for the Guardian, TLS, Literary Review and Novara.

Reviews

[Eddie Clarke · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is about live issues in the current U.K. Labour Party, a notoriously factional organisation, and the number of stars reviewers award it will probably tell you more about the individual reviewer’s political stance than the book itself.

Eagleton is unabashedly hostile to Starmer, but this slim volume (just under 200 pages of text) is thoroughly researched and full of foot-noted references and sources. It’s very readable for a political book - I flew through it in one evening - and I recommend it it to all Labour Party members or supporters, or anyone interested in the U.K. political scene. Interesting to me was that Eagleton, although hostile, remains strenuously balanced and forensic - he disagrees with or moderates some of the more aggressive online attack-lines on Starmer (the Saville case is not mentioned, for instance). Yet the book taken as a whole is withering.

For me the first section dealing with Starmer’s career as a lawyer and head of the Crown Prosecution Service was the most eye-opening (and hair raising). This period of his career has until now been very much under-examined, with Starmer escaping scrutiny and accountability.

[Geevee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oliver Eagleton has written a interesting book on Sir Keir Starmer. It is not a biography more a review of four aspects with the chapters entitled: The Lawyer; The Politician; The Candidate; The Leader.

It is quite clear from the outset that Mr Eagleton is not a fan of Starmer, but this should not deter readers as The Starmer Project is to my mind mostly fair and balanced.

In The Lawyer , we see Starmer's time as the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). The DPP is the head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and are responsible for prosecution of cases investigated by the police and other UK law enforcement agencies. The DPP is third most senior public prosecutor in England and Wales, ranking after the attorney general and solicitor general [https://www.cps.gov.uk/about-cps]
There is some detail here on how he operated as DPP, and made alliances with opposite numbers for example in the US. The author cites various cases that Starmer held the pen on in respect to prosecute or not. These make for interesting reading both in decision making and Starmer's view and causes/cases he supported. Again, the author is quite clear on where his views lay, and this makes for a good chapter to challenge the reader's own views against the evidence (no pun) presented.

The Politician sees Starmer elected to parliament, and immediately thrust into the life of the Labour MP and indeed into the febrile atmosphere of the then Labour parties relationships and factions: those who supported the then leader Jeremy Corbyn and those who didn't (in simple terms). here, Mr Eagleton again uses people who worked with and for Starmer as well as others who played central roles in Corbyn's Leader of the Opposition (LOTO) team, or at Millbank, the Labour party's central HQ in London. This chapter provided good insight into how Starmer operates and in which groups he worked and with whom; notably as Corbyn's Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, and thus played a central role in Labour's posture and importantly, within this book, its public statements and his going against the party line and explicit briefings from Corbyn and LOTO's office.

This chapter is followed by The Candidate and the period where Jeremy Corbyn resigns as Labour leader and Starmer campaigns successfully to become leader. This for me was the most interesting chapter as there are some good insights and inputs from people who worked in Millbank, LOTO (prior to Corbyn's departure) and other MPs and Labour party officials. What we see - again as the author is clear and determined to show - is a man who will change direction, adopt distinct strategies and manage messages exceptionally well to get reach his aim.

We then see Starmer as The Leader , which takes us up to early 2022. Here we see the approach he takes to remove the left-wing Corbynites from key posts in the shadow cabinet, and indeed wider into the depths of the party. Moreover, we see this in his working to support the Conservative Government during Covid, and see Starmer as one of the Labour party MPs who supported faster and harder lockdowns and reductions in civil liberties. This may seem odd for a Labour leader, but this statist, right of the party, law and order, keen to control benefits spending position is one that Mr Eagleton shows throughout this book.

The final chapter is Afterword and I found this an interesting area where Mr Eagleton supposed how Corbyn and a group of supporters broke away to create a new left-wing party, and how that might have played out in the political landscape.
I was led to seeing parallels with the current Conservative party (those in Government at the time of writing), where a break-away group, possibly with Johnson, Patel and others, possibly including Nigel Farage, created a new right-wing party. Why do I say this, and indeed Mr Eagleton in his chapter? It is because in truth the current Labour under Starmer and Conservative under Sunak parties we have are actually so very close in actions, behaviours and their policies and principles. This may seem odd at first glance, but when we have a high-tax, big state and big state spending, high immigration, Net Zero, Conservative Government there is little between Starmer's Labour party and Sunak's Tories.
British politics would be a lot more interesting if we had break-away parties on both sides of the current two major parties (not forgetting the Liberal-Democrats and Scottish National parties).

Overall, there are aspects where the choice of words is used to press a point of negativity or behaviour [by Starmer] that does not fit with the author's view of a hard left Labour party. I was disappointed there was no mention of the Muslim child grooming gangs and the controversy that has followed Starmer in the press about decisions he is supposed to have made to prosecute or not since leaving the DPP; even as the CPS with Nazir Afzal acting as chief crown prosecutor for north-west England has prosecuted tens of men for their involvement. That said, we see Starmer's character over the 4 chapters, and whilst Mr Eagleton may disagree with my own Afterword here, his book is one to be recommended to all those interested in UK politics, especially as we may very likely see Starmer as PM in 2024.

[Mark Hebden · Rating 5 out of 5]

There are some people out there who would dismiss this book out of hand as it is published by Verso; well known in literary circles as a socialist publisher whose roster of authors generally have no time for the Blairite wing of the Labour party. It should be noted though that the book has received positive reviews from the likes of Simon Jenkins and Peter Oborne; men who identify as one-nation conservatives with Jenkins referring to it as a “balanced” study and indeed the opening pages identify a student and young lawyer heavily involved with progressive politics, writing articles for a publication called Socialist Alternatives which was the house magazine for International Revolutionary Marxist Tendency – not exactly a “moderate” or “centrist” political body. He worked at the human rights charity Liberty which subsequently grew to larger prominence under Shami Chakrabarti. He assisted with the famous McLibel trial, mostly pro-bono and argued their case for legal aid, successfully, in the European Court of Human Rights

A turning point in his personal politics seems to have come after becoming an advisor to the Northern Irish Policing Board (NIPB). During his time there he ignored complaints by the Catholic population of Ireland that the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) was still largely a tool of the British state engaged in oppressing communities based on religious belief. After a march was approved by police which resulted in unionist demonstrators carving their way through a catholic area, clashes unsurprisingly broke out at which point PSNI riot police attacked counter-demonstrators with water cannon and beating people with truncheons – in his report Starmer condoned the one-sided police brutality. When Sinn Fein requested the NIPB ban the use of tasers and plastic bullets against children Starmer threw the request in the bin earning praise from Ian Paisley Jr. who said that Starmer gave the force “legal cover” to do what they wanted.

He was effectively hand-picked by his predecessor Ken MacDonald for the role of Director of Public Prosecutions and it was here that his passion for restructuring and focusing on the minutiae of a bureaucratic machine came to prominence. Colleagues noticed however that he found it difficult to make decisions without them being run by several people and preferably focus groups first – this is an aspect of his personality that hasn’t changed and why he never comments quickly on a changing political scene – not useful in the world of 24 hour news where the narrative moves so quickly and with even the most obvious cases of right and wrong he is incapable of offering commentary. His period as DPP is something he is very proud of but some of the decisions he made and the prosecutions he went ahead with (not to mention those he didn’t) raise some difficult questions that have yet to be answered.

Under his tenure the office of the Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) worked closely with the Cameron government on the early formulation of the “hostile environment” policy while at the same time was bankrolled by the American state thanks to the diplomatic assistance and approval regarding the ongoing War On Terror. Starmer was a regular visitor to Eric Holder, Obama’s attorney general who was given assurances that anyone he wanted for extradition to the US to face charges would be handed over no questions asked – this included Christopher Tappin who had sold some batteries online to someone in Iran which contravened a US sanctions regime on the Islamic republic – Tappin was sent packing to America, forced to leave behind a chronically ill wife and spend time in a jail in Pennsylvania. Starmer oversaw the case of Gary McKinnon, an autistic IT expert who had hacked into the remarkably insecure CIA database to look for evidence of UFO encounters – in this high profile case Starmer never wavered in his desire to extradite the man despite several medical professionals stating that McKinnon would likely commit suicide if removed from the country. When cornered by McKinnon’s mother who demanded an explanation and for the DPP to listen to her concern, as a mother, all Starmer could offer in reply was “speaking to you is making me uncomfortable”. It took Theresa May of all people as home secretary to personally refuse the extradition which apparently sent Starmer into a “rage” who booked the next flight to Washington to grovel at the seat of Holder. Even Boris Johnson, mayor of London at the time, stated that “to extradite a man diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome to America for trial would be extraordinarily cruel and inhumane”. Many other people were extradited under the flimsiest of excuses the were rooted in Starmer’s own Americophilia.

When such cases coupled with those of Julian Assange, personally overseen by Starmer and who tried to keep it going despite the lack of interest from the his opposite number in Sweden losing all interest, one can easily conclude that Starmer is an agent of the state (which state is open to question) – which isn’t a conspiratorial position. He is someone who follows the rules to the absolute tip of the point and will not be swayed from it – as long as it protects the state – he has no room for emotional response or moral pivot; he sees the security forces be they police, military or government as incapable of doing wrong because rules are rules. Under his tenure so called terrorists were suffering “extraordinary rendition”; one of those nonsense terms used by government because they don’t have the guts to call what they’re doing by the proper name – kidnap and torture.

The most questionable rulings by Starmer as DPP were probably those that involved British police officers. His predecessor refused to prosecute the police killers of Jean Charles de Menezes who was gunned down on the London Underground network. MacDonald was working on evidence available at the time but by the time Starmer was in post further evidence had become available including CCTV footage which completely contradicted the police narrative. Starmer changed nothing and no charges were ever brought. The famous case of Ian Tomlinson was similar and caused huge controversy at the time – Tomlinson was attacked by PC Simon Harwood during the G20 protests in London (Tomlinson wasn’t even part of the demonstration) and died subsequently. Starmer refused to prosecute the PC on grounds of “inconsistent medical evidence” despite the fact that two separate post-mortems recommended the charge of manslaughter. Jimmy Mubenga was killed by guards hired by the home office in a botched deportation, Starmer recommended no prosecution despite a later inquest ruling informal death. In a historical case brought forward with new evidence against the killers of Blair Peach in 1979 who were police officers, Starmer again concluded the medical reports were insufficient despite clear evidence of the teacher’s head being smashed open by multiple truncheon strikes.

Starmer was entirely comfortable with the actions of what are now known as Spycops – police officers who go deep undercover to infiltrate what they call subversive networks, which in reality are environmental groups and trade unions to name a few. They were and still are sanctioned to engage in deceit on behalf of the state to the point where some officers had sexual relationships resulting in children with left-wing peaceful activists. One case resulted in 114 activists being arrested prior to a planned demonstration at a power station – Starmer’s prosecutors withheld evidence from the defendants which ultimately led to their exoneration. Despite this Starmer refused to review cases which involved illegally gained undercover testimony which could exonerate hundreds, maybe thousands of falsely convicted people. Starmer asked Sir Christopher Rose to look into what happened in the case and appeared later, confidently on the news stating that the report found no systematic failings at the office of the DPP; of course it didn’t because Starmer set the terms of reference for the review which removed the ability to declare failings at his office and refused to countenance a look into the wider aspect of undercover policing. In short it was a whitewash, arranged by Starmer.

Starmer was lobbied during his time as DPP by womens groups on why the number of people charged with rape had fallen under his tenure by 14% despite a three per cent rise in reported cases. Starmer committed to look into it but he shouldn’t have needed to look very far; in 2011 he issued new guidance on rape which gave more power to the police to determine the credibility of victims. He advised that police should not even submit a case to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) unless it met his evidential tests. There was a similar drop in prosecutions for domestic violence cases during his time in office which leads the reader to question, does Starmer have a blind spot when it comes to the safety of women? It certainly shows why he saw no hesitation in stating that the response to the murder of Sarah Everard at the hands of a serving Met Police officer should be “more police on the streets”. One area where prosecutions did rise in his term was for those women who apparently falsely accused men of rape, a significant proportion of which were overturned on appeal.

Starmer’s conduct during the and after the demonstrations in London after the murder of Mark Duggan demonstrate neatly why he fails to understand minority communities and ended up referring to Black Lives Matter as a “moment” in time as opposed to the global movement it really is. Over 4000 people were arrested in the aftermath of the civil disobedience. Prior to this he showed his authoritarian instincts while prosecuting peaceful demonstrators at the 2009 G20 in London. Among them were Harvie Brown who had been kettled and assaulted by police resulting in two head injuries and dental trauma for which he was charged with violent disorder carrying a maximum penalty of five years in prison. The same charge was used for people who stole a policeman’s helmet or threw a placard down in an empty street. Alfie Meadows was assaulted by a police officer to the extent that he had to undergo emergency brain surgery – Starmer prosecuted him three times. The DPP also drew up guidance to make it easier to charge and jail peaceful protesters if their actions “caused disruption to people or businesses” – this is the man who as Labour leader now is supposed to be opposing the current Police and Crime Bill which contains exactly the kind of thing he promoted in his previous employment. In response to Duggan demonstrators Starmer brought in 24 hour court sittings and encouraged the most extreme sentencing responses to the most trivial offences. Children as young as 13 were being brought into court at 4am for cross examination. The same children were remanded in custody before sentencing in contravention of the Bail Act 1976. Starmer claimed he had made decisions to increase the speed of sentencing rather than the severity but this simply makes no sense when heard alongside the fact that Starmer ordered cases to be moved from magistrates to courts to crown courts, with the latter usually reserved for more serious offences and carrying weightier prison terms. He also declared that people taking simple items from shops previously broken into by someone else – water for instance or a chocolate bar – should be charged with burglary rather than theft which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. His predecessor Ken MacDonald, by now questioning his original decision to headhunt Keir Starmer called the handling of these cases “a collective loss or proportion” and lacking “humanity or justice”.

One way in which Starmer dissembles is that he attempts to take credit for things that were ultimately forced upon him and turned out to be right such as the phone hacking cases. At the time Starmer was making recommendations to charge so called “benefits cheat” under the Fraud Act (maximum sentence 10 years) he was doing all he could to absolve tabloids of all guilt in relation to phone hacking allegations. Starmer had attended the Times Christmas party and been taken to lunch by Sun editor Rebekah Brooks when he was appointed DPP; later when credible allegations of phone hacking came to light Starmer refused to authorise prosecution of any Murdoch journalist despite the CPS having a litany of evidence – this cannot be put down to an error as he refused to authorise prosecutions on three separate occasions. Starmer’s explanation was that he was told by Met assistant commissioner John Yates that in his judgement there was no case to answer and that he simply took that at face value. Yates was a close friend of News of the World deputy editor Neil Wallis and had come to his conclusion after weighing up 11,000 pages of evidence in eight hours. It was only later when public pressure became unbearable that Starmer flipped – as a consequence of his prevarication he was censured by a parliamentary select committee and yet now he consistently claims that he stood up to the Murdoch press and was responsible for prosecuting the wrong-doers; in reality in had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the courts.

I have focused heavily here on the first third of the book. It feels like the most important section as it throws a light on Starmer’s career before becoming a politician, since when his life has been much more well documented. The next chapters are broken down into his early political career, campaigning to become an MP in the safe seat of Holborn and St Pancras and his time in the Shadow Cabinet as Shadow Brexit Minister where is Machiavellian instincts are revealed expertly by Eagleton before the final chapter which details his underhanded campaign to become Labour leader; positioning himself as a continuity candidate in terms of socially progressive policy making but also as someone who could unite the Party. In fact two years down the line the Party is more divided than ever, a Stalinist purge has been carried out on socialists, while black and Asian voters have been turned off by the apparent racism of Starmer and his manoeuvring of Labour. Trade Unions are pulling their funding as Starmer seeks endorsement from the most socially irresponsible businesses in the country and his bureaucracy has unfairly targeted left-wing Jewish people for expulsion from the party more than any other demographic. All of this is explained in great detail and points to Starmer one day being remembered, at best, as an arcane pub quiz answer. His tale is one of what could have been but he is a man singularly incapable for grasping the moment. In response to a global pandemic and the most criminal government in the history of the UK was to support them in many of their policies and abstain in areas where no Labour MP should ever abstain. This book deserves to be read widely, not only to let the light in on who Starmer really is, but to show how our media propagandise their chosen politicians, painting them as somebody honest and sincere when their words and actions tell an entirely different story.

[Darran Mclaughlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this in one sitting yesterday. It's a quick read, and I would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in the Labour Party or British politics. Eagleton has done the research to tell you who Kier Starmer actually is, which is a social climbing establishment lackey who has no interest in advancing Socialist politics and a great deal of interest in advancing his own position in the British state. I knew most of this already, because I played a peripheral part in some of what is described in this book. I was in Kier Starmer's leadership campaign video (for which I was well roasted by my friends), because it looked good for him to be on the campaign trail standing next to a black guy. A few months later I was suspended for over a year and not allowed to stand as a candidate in the local elections in Bristol for allowing a meeting to take place at which a motion was allowed to be heard in support of Jeremy Corbyn. Other people around the country who were suspended for precisely the same reasons as me were readmitted months before me, and I was obviously being singled out and targeted by the Right Wing Labour machine.
I knew that Starmer was a right wing establishment candidate in the lead up to the leadership contest, because it was obvious if you were paying attention. But unfortunately he lied shamelessly throughout his leadership campaign and enough Labour members (including on the Left) were fooled for him to win convincingly, so now we have a pathetic, withered, right wing Labour Party who do nothing to challenge the most outrageous, dangerous Right Wing Tory government in the last few decades, who are literally responsible for the needless deaths of many thousands of people, and who have absolutely no prospect of being elected themselves unless the Tories screw it up so badly they lose by default. And none of them will do anything to seriously tackle the climate catastrophe that is looming before us, and which will be a bigger threat than the World Wars.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you weren't angry already, you will be after you've finished the first section...

Short and sweet, this is a potted biography of the not-so-new leader of the UK's Labour party - part nice haircut, part not-so-nice lawyer - that grew out of an article that Eagleton wrote for Verso (the publisher) that he was asked to turn into this book. Don't be fooled by the size though, there's a LOT of stuff in here - well researched and referenced (I'd use the word forensic if it wasn't already tainted) - and broken down into sections covering the stages of his progress as the lawyer, the politician, the candidate and the leader.

[Sean O'Donoghue · Rating 4 out of 5]

This biography of Starmer doesn’t have much, if anything, positive to say about the man. The reason for that is not necessary the possible bias of the author. It would be rather than there is nothing good to say about Starmer.

Books are useful in that they provide a continuum of what is the first writing of history, the newspaper reports. They provide context. Many of us who follow politics, especially on social media, are aware of much of what this book relates. As far as newspaper reporting goes, the reader can always claim that one swallow doth not make a Spring. But when you have a whole flock of swallows all lined up, the pattern emerges.

We do know that Starmer was elected leader of the Labour Party on the promise of retaining Corbyn’s manifesto. And that every single one of those manifesto items have been removed.

And the pattern shows without a doubt that Starmer is most certainly not a socialist, but a placebo for it, masquerading as the dominant opposition to the Conservative Government, but in fact being effectively a partner of the Conservatives, but slightly to the right of them politically. and totally devoid of policies. He is like the not-so-bright person in a meeting, with nothing to contribute, but goes along with whatever anyone else has to say. Alas, in this case it is the Conservative Government he is nodding in agreement with.

Starmer’s “servant of the state” and Atlanticism are also well covered: his outlook on law and order and militarism outdo Conservative Party Conference, which is itself far to the right of the Conservative Parliamentary Party. Knowing what we now know about Starmer, Julian Assange’s current predicament, initiated by Starmer, is entirely consistent with his protection of the State’s disposing of the rulebook when it suits it.

The book covers fairly well how Labour moved from rejection of a second referendum for their 2017 manifesto, to their move to la la land by the time the 2019 election came up, a move led primarily by Starmer, in conjunction with a number of Labour’s right, such as Campbell, Blair, Mandelson. The deceit of Starmer led to Corbyn regularly having to keep quiet, in order to give the impression of a united front. Whilst Starmer and his Progress chums thought they were playing a blinder, the electorate saw them, and alas the Labour Party, as effectively not knowing whether to shit or get off the pot as far as Brexit was concerned.

Missing from the book is what I think to be a herd of elephants in the room, Starmer paying off the 6 Party apparatchiks to buy their silence. In this he went against legal opinion and six treacherous employees laughed all the way to the bank, where they will have deposited £100,000 per person. This was the beginning of the Party heading towards bankruptcy. The claimants threatened to sue the Party for breach of Data Protection leaked by a whistleblower of Whatsap messaging between the cabal. The file showed how these employees did all in their power to prevent Labour winning the 2017 General Election. This for me is probably the biggest scandal in British politics since I first voted for Harold Wilson’s Labour Party back in the 1960s. The Forde Report was commissioned to look into the contents of the leak file: it was supposed to report back early in 2021. We still await it.

And how has all this worked out. Bringing in Blue Labourism to patronise the Northern Red Walls fell at the first hurdle. His focus-group led policy show him as being an empty vessel, incapable of leadership and and with not an ethical bone in his body. It is said that Labour never win elections, the Tories lose them. But the Tories need a lot more Partygates, rape charges, and paedophilia imprisonment of their members for Starmers lot to overtake them at election time. And even if Labour were to come to power, it wouldn’t make the slightest bit of difference, as they are competing with the Tories for the far right political space.

The Starmer project gives the distinct impression that a group from Cental Castings have been employed to kill off socialism in the UK by masquerading as a political party that represents workers. As such they take up the space in the political arena that the left should inhabit. And there doesn’t seem to be room for two such groupings.

[John Sheridan · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think I probably agree - in very broad terms - with Eagleton's thesis here but really this is not very good. Taking Starmer seriously as an ideological politician, and constructing that ideology, is definitely a worthwhile project, but this isn't it. Nakedly partisan and mostly concerned with relitigating Corbynism and the 2017/2019 GEs. Also some wildly bad takes on Russia.

[Damian Mendes-Kelly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Initially I felt as though the author was just cherry picking the bad stuff, but the bad stuff really piles up. It's not just that Starmer isn't of the left, but that he takes every opportunity to serve the needs of the establishment, and barely even qualifies as a liberal. The chapter on his time as DPP is shocking and has really made me reassess.

[Domhnall · Rating 5 out of 5]

This short and topical book provides an account of Starmer's record as a lawyer and as a Director of Public Prosecutions, his part in Labour's chaotic Brexit politics and the 2019 election defeat, his election to lead the party, his ejection of Corbyn from the party and his stifling of dissent from its members. It describes his political direction in the first year as leader, anticipates his approach to any general election and very briefly discusses the options for the political left.

The book passes judgement on a lot of other leading members of the party. It confirms my own belief that, whatever Corbyn's personal limitations (which are real, but he never claimed to be the new Lenin), it would have been possible to build a radical and effective campaign around him as leader, but who on earth was going to carry out that task? The overwhelming majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party were determined to prevent that happening, even John McDonnell and Diane Abbot wanted to placate the majority and his immediate entourage was never capable of the task. It is absolutely certain that Corbyn, if he had won the 2019 election, would have been unable to build an effective, radical government.

Starmer has nothing to offer the Labour Party and he has devoted his undoubted skills as a lawyer to ensure that nobody who does will be allowed to function. While it is no longer even vaguely socialist, it is also no longer Blairite, since the Blair project has run its course. What remains is an alternative Conservative party; it is not evident that it is more competent or more trustworthy, although the bar has been set very low, but it hangs on the prospect that Britain's two party system will at some future date provide the opportunity to form a government. When it does, it will serve corporate interests in domestic politics and American interests abroad, while continuing a heavy investment in the authoritarian, security state to which Starmer, as DPP, has already given so much. On climate change, incidentally, Starmer's Labour will see the planet burn before it will regulate the free market for the sake of change. They will put forward vague and nice sounding promises drawn from the nattering of focus groups and that will be the extent of it. It is hard to imagine a more disagreeable, disloyal or mediocre cabal of self serving careerists.

Quotes

Starmer’s flexible approach to facts has also been carried over into his new profession. The prosecutor famously told journalists that he opposed harsh sentences in response to the 2011 riots, when in fact he had taken concrete steps to increase their severity. He assured the public that he had commissioned a ‘thorough’ examination of phone hacking evidence, when he had requested only a partial and inadequate review. He went on to claim that he had ‘taken on the Murdoch press for phone hacking’, despite being reprimanded by MPs for his failure to do so. He asserted that the ‘independent’ Rose report had refuted accusations of a systemic problem with spycops, when in fact it was a patent whitewash. [p58]

He threw his weight behind Andy Burnham, the health secretary under Gordon Brown, who signalled his political direction by launching his leadership campaign in the headquarters of an accountancy firm famous for facilitating large-scale tax avoidance. Burnham’s politics were consistent with Starmer’s DPP record. The candidate had backed further cuts to social welfare (asserting that Labour must not be ‘soft on people who want something for nothing’), praised NATO, supported mass surveillance laws and defended the War on Terror. Before the Islington North MP Jeremy Corbyn entered the race – clinching the necessary number of nominations at the last minute – Burnham was widely thought to be the frontrunner. [p60]

An aide who worked closely with Starmer between 2016 and 2019 reflected that this was ‘typical of Keir. He can’t argue from a political standpoint; it always has to be about process’. [p63]

There is nothing that Corbyn could have done to placate the editors at the Guardian or BBC. No amount of savvy PR or pro-war sentiment could have overcome their implacable hostility. The only option was to propose bold policies, like a progressive Leave deal, that could break through the negative press coverage. As Karie Murphy remarked, the defeat of 2019 ‘was never about the media strategy; it was about the political direction of the party’. The first could never be effective if the second was misjudged. [p119]

Because ‘it is far easier for a governing party to rally undecided voters back to its banner than it is to win over those who have defected to another party’, Labour’s tactic of ‘gaining by default’ may reach its limit once campaigning begins in earnest. [p163]

Based on the above analysis, it is possible to list the fundamental features of this project: 1) a ‘values-led’, non-antagonistic electoral strategy; 2) an unsparing crackdown on the Labour Left, seen as more dangerous than the Conservatives; 3) an Atlanticist– authoritarian disposition, combining intervention abroad with repression at home; and 4) a return to neoliberal economic precepts, overseen by Blairite leftovers. [p164]

The UK needs an opposition worthy of the name – and Labour will not provide it any time soon. [p170]

[Tom Stoddart]

didn't think i'd be interested in reading anything about the l*bour p*rty in 2022 but eagleton's biography of preeminent wrecker keir starmer is a welcome corrective to the 'empty suit' image of starmer and a solid post-mortem of the corbyn years that correctly locates corbyn's failure in his capitulation to the people's vote campaign.

[Jamie · Rating 4 out of 5]

For the most part extremely interesting & good analysis. I particularly like the claim that Starmer is not merely a vacuous career politician but actually does have some politics, albeit ones that ought to terrify us: statist, socially conservative, and nigh-on authoritarian. Starmer's recent political shenanigans totally vindicate this.

This book does get a bit bogged down in trying to utterly vindicate Corbyn and blame his downfall on Starmer (certainly some truth in this, but hardly the whole truth). It also constructs a problematic hero of Corbyn meaning that it completely fails to engage with the genuine, if potentially overstated, problem of antisemitism in the labour party. At times, this reads like an old timey socialist manifesto in a way that doesn't feel very modern. Perhaps more importantly, it seems to switch focus from Starmer to Corbyn for too long in a book about Starmer - it's more of an obsession with vanquishing Corbyn's replacement.

Some other takeaways about his character: Starmer rarely sticks his neck out, speaks more of process than policy/ideology, and lives up to his boring status.

Particularly insightful is Starmer's deep ties to corporate interests, coercive state forces (police, MI5, armed forces) and Atlanticism and his subsequent utter disavowal of human rights. His record as CPP is frankly terrifying, completely failing to defend women, attacking women for making 'false rape cases', failing to deal with the spycops episode, failing to prosecute after the phone hacking scandal, and using his position to launch his political career. He has certainly been corrupted by power.

I would recommend to anyone who wants to know more about the apparent 'saviour' of Labour (not...) who seems tipped to be the next PM. Makes me hope for a hung parliament.

[Mark Edon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Astute and readable analysis.

He is a Tory.

His bland Approach is actually deliberate and not incompetence. He thinks you can win at leadership by just following focus groups. This is pseudo politics as executed by and admin focussed authoritarian:

*Anti black/Muslim/GRT/immigrant racism.
*Mixed with anti disabled/poor/chronically lies and hate mongering.

What a terrible fate for a party that had done such wonders in the past.

I’m voting green till something better and non neoliberal/Tory comes along.

[BeesReads · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have tended to view Starmer as a malleable dupe, installed by the hard right of the Labour party to do their bidding. This book shows him in a different, more proactive light, fully complicit in the ongoing destruction of the Labour party and a staunch believer in extreme establishmentism.
4* because the book does jump around a bit.

[Jordan Phizacklea-Cullen · Rating 4 out of 5]

A swift but necessary overview of how Keir Starmer's prior reputation as a pioneering human rights lawyer isn't quite accurate, and how his opportunism has now found him as Leader of the Opposition in name only. Dispiriting in many ways but a refreshing read nevertheless in providing serious analysis of the man who still wants to be the next Prime Minister.

[Lawrence Watts · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most anger-inducing, black-pilling books I have read recently. I knew that Starmer had some dodgy episodes in his past, I had no idea how bad he truly is.
To type out any more of my thoughts risks getting me banned.

[Enrico Mascarpone · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent! Get your copy ASAP.

[Fionn McGorry · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent debut book by a very talented young writer.

[James Nixon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Started this book already hating the most pathetic man in the country, Keir Starmer, finished the book hating him even more.

[Rachael Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had high hopes for this book about the most forensic of adults in the room...lol. it's well written with interesting info in it but the writer is such a Corbyn partisan and I don't agree with many of his opinions of what went wrong during the Corbyn years. For example a 'left wing Brexit' is pretty much what Starmer is trying to 'deliver' (lol) now. Still worth reading, the chapters on Starmer's career prior to his entry to politics are really depressing. I'd have liked more info on how he rationalised any of this. In light of recent events regarding Peter Mandelson etc I'd also like to read some more about how SKS dealt with Jimmy Savile (or didn't).

3.5 because it's still worth reading, it's easy to read and shocking in parts even though I found it pretty biased in places (although what did I expect, lol)

[Leif · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eagleton's fascinatingly even-handed treatment is, if anything, more damning of Keir Starmer. In these pages, the man comes across quite clearly as an authoritarian interested in power and fearful of decisions. His success can be measured in tragedy.

[Mairi Byatt · Rating 3 out of 5]

A must read to anyone left leaning politically, this man is an idiot at best or a psychopath! He has destroyed the Labour Party and several wonderful politicians along the way! He is not a politician and never will be. This book is terrifying, he is Blair without the Charisma!

[Nickatb · Rating 3 out of 5]

My review for ‘Socialist Lawyer’ magazine: https://t.co/ZW1bzx6yEJ

[Nicholas Driscoll · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very readable an believable insight into the thoroughly unlikable Sir Keir Starmer. One that poses some interesting questions for progressive political approaches to the future.

[Steve Angelkov · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting read staging the latter political career and movements of Starmer.

Chapter 1 for me was standout with Starmer's role as DPP at the CPS, whilst working alongside a 'tory government.

[Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mostly balanced analysis of keir starmer’s career so far and paints an incredibly bleak future for the UK. Great book

[Mouki · Rating 4 out of 5]

Compulsory reading for everyone.

[Lewis White · Rating 4 out of 5]

Starmer is such a little rat

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

a history of starmer and his project, from his DPP days to winning the leadership campaign. published in 2022, so could use an update with an additional chapter.

[Jacob biscuits · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a clear and informative assessment of Starmer himself, which traces his actions from the CPS to the leadership of the Labour Party, and, I think, tries to arrange the facts in such a way as to allow them to speak for themselves, rather than trying to condemn Starmer from an overtly contradictory perspective. And aside from some spurious glossings of newspaper headlines and a general blindness to any vision for a widespread and organised leftist movement in Britain outside of the past present and future of Jeremy Corbyn, to whom I found the book addresses nothing short of unreserved idol worship, it pretty much succeeds: one can learn a lot from this book. I however despise nepotism, and anyway am not particularly predisposed to be impressed by mistaking a cold and embittered autopsy of the corpse of UK Labour’s socialist potential for especially insightful or impressive journalism.

[Tim Gillett · Rating 5 out of 5]

If like me, you were puzzled that just a couple of years after gaining thirty extra seats and a nine per cent swing in the 2017 General Election, Jeremy Corbyn led Labour to its worst General Election defeat since the 1930's, you'll find many of the answers in Oliver Eagleton's The Starmer Project.

The 2019 election was known as the Brexit Election. Theresa May had been replaced by Boris Johnson after having failed to get any type of Brexit deal through Parliament. Oliver Eagleton quite rightly cites Brexit as the main reason Corbyn's Labour was so soundly beaten. I recall the campaign quite clearly - Boris's message was clear - vote for me to get Brexit done. Corbyn's message was, well, I wasn't sure what it was at at the time and was thankful tio the author for reminding me how muddled and confusing it was. The reason it was so confusing was, according to Oliver Eagleton - Keir Starmer, at the time the shadow Brexit minister. In great detail, the author goes through the laborious and labyrinthine web that Starmer deliberately weaved with the help of Labour remainers including the dark Lord Mandelson and spin operator Alastair Campbell to stop Labour from approving what the majority had voted for in the 2016 referndum. The author writes that not only did Starmer virtually dictate to the party what Labour's position should be on Brexit going into the 2019 election, but drove the leader Jeremy Corbyn into such a corner that when asked what Labour's message to voters about Brexit was in the General Election camppaign, out came fuzzy gobbledy gook. It was so unusual for Corbyn, one of the few politicians to answer clearly and honestly mosty questions fired by interviewers. It was also, so disheartening, because as Eagleton writes, it eclipsed the other positive policies Corbyn was putting forward and which had been so popular in 2017.

Oliver Eagleton says it was a deliberate ploy by Starmer, arguing that either way he would come out on top. If Corbyn lost the election, he would resign and Starmer would become leader. After all, writes Eagleton, Starmer spent a good deal of the general election campaign garnering support for his leadership bid. If Corbyn had won the election, Starmer's Brexit plan would go into action - either trying to get an elusive great deal with the EU and back in a customs union which would be seen as capitulation by Brexiteers, or a second vote with remain high on the ballot paper.

The author's assessment of Keir Starmer's subsequent tenure as leader of Labour is accurately dire. Comparing him to Tony Blair or Gordon Brown, he questions what vision Starmer has as a potential Labour Prime Minister, in vain searching for clear, creative, fresh policies being advocated by the man who wants to rebuild Britain. Accurately, he assesses how Starmer has spent his time supporting many of the policies the Conservative Government has introduced, and crucially writes how Starmer has laid low, hoping to benefit from the unpopularity of the long tenure of the Tories in power rather than reach out with ideas and emotions of his own to lure voters to his campaign to become PM.

Oliver Eagleton's account of Starmer removing the Labour whip from Jeremy Corbyn over anti semitism in the party is such a relief to read, yet so unbelivable. It smacks of Starmer's indecision, deciding to reinstate Corbyn, then deciding not to after being besieged by leading Jewish members of the party. It also smacks of Starmer's attempt to rid Labour of socialism and is accompanied by Eagleton's account of how the new leader changed party rules making it harder for left wingers to be selected for election. It leads the author to ask whether Socialists in the Labour Party including MPs should quit and start up their own, new party to try to build a movement based on true and traditional Labour values. He resigns himself to the fact that Socialists are staying as party members, lying low to see if Starmer does lead Labour into government, and then at some point re-invigorating the party and returning it to its original working class values, beliefs and aspirations.

The author's final words, written just last year when Starmer was beginning to maintain an opion poll lead, are pretty chilling -"...the UK needs an opposition worthy of the name - and Labour will not provide it any time soon." This is particularly profound now, given Starmer's refusal to call for a ceasefire in Gaza. He's obviously holding onto the Prime Minister's coat tails on the issue, who himself is echoing the US president. But, if you read The Starmer Project, you'll be surprised how one sided Starmer is towards the Jewish lobby rather than the Palestinian. Eagleton writes, "on the UN International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinmian people - a key event in the Palestinian calendar dating back to 1977 - Starmer pointedly attended an event hosted by the Jewish Labour Movement and Labour Friends of Israel." He goes on, "a group of prominent British Palestinians sent Starmer five separate letters asking him to redress the increasingly 'hostile environment' for Palestinians within the party. They received no reply."

I was left asking myself do I really want that man as my next Prime Minister?