Keir Starmer has just reached a new embarrassing milestone in his political career, and it’s hard not to feel a pang of sympathy for him.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister found himself in a thoroughly cringe-worthy situation that made many across the nation collectively wince.
For those who have been following Starmer's journey, it’s clear that he has struggled to connect with his audience from the very beginning. Some individuals simply lack the ability to deliver humor, and Starmer appears to fall into that category. Having a good sense of humor isn’t merely about memorizing clever one-liners; it requires a sense of timing, situational awareness, and an innate instinct for what resonates with others. Unfortunately, Starmer seems to lack these essential qualities. This became painfully obvious during Prime Minister's Questions yesterday when his attempts at humor repeatedly flopped.
Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party, has adeptly recognized this shortcoming, sharply criticizing Starmer for the Labour Party's incessant policy reversals. In a rather blunt attempt to jab back at the Tories, Starmer made a crude joke, saying, "They’ve had more positions than the Kama Sutra. No wonder they’re knackered and left the country screwed." Just repeating those words makes me cringe.
A frequent error among those lacking comedic talent is resorting to crude humor in a desperate bid for laughter. Starmer’s so-called ‘dad’ joke didn’t elicit any chuckles; instead, it induced groans. He followed up with another remark that was more convoluted than assembling furniture from Ikea. Even if his second joke had been a hit, his stiff delivery would have likely ruined it.
However, this situation extends beyond mere comedy; it reflects a broader issue of judgment. Starmer doesn’t just miss the mark with his attempts at humor; he consistently misreads situations across the board. This inability to gauge public sentiment is now evident in his failure to introduce a key housing policy. Oddly enough, this brings us to an important topic: housing.
While it might have flown under the radar for many, shares in the FTSE 250 housebuilder Vistry Group plummeted by 9% yesterday, signaling a significant drop in demand for new homes. What’s behind this decline? Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ recent Budget sent shockwaves through potential homebuyers, instilling fear and hesitation.
This development is particularly significant because Starmer had touted a housing boom as his flagship initiative—almost the sole growth strategy he embraced upon taking office. His rallying cry was to "Get Britain building again," with a bold goal of constructing 300,000 new homes annually over five years. The ambition was to alleviate the housing crisis, create employment opportunities, and stimulate economic growth. However, many critics—including myself—were skeptical from the outset. I stated on July 22, less than three weeks after the election, that Starmer’s unwavering belief in the ‘build, baby build’ mantra was almost naive, leading one to question why previous administrations hadn’t succeeded with similar plans. But the truth is, they had.
After securing a massive victory in 2019, Boris Johnson also made a similar promise for 300,000 homes per year. While he may have had a knack for delivering a punchline, Johnson ultimately failed to fulfill this promise too. The same can be said for the New Labour era, the coalition government, and successive Conservative regimes. In reality, the UK struggles to consistently produce more than 150,000 homes each year.
As I noted previously, major housebuilders like Barratt Developments and Taylor Wimpey were actually reducing their output due to soaring costs related to labor, materials, and financing, all while affordability for buyers continued to dwindle.
Chancellor Reeves only exacerbated the issue with her proposed £25 billion ‘jobs tax’ and substantial minimum wage increases, which further inflated labor costs. It became increasingly clear that Starmer's ambitious building initiative was destined to falter—much like his attempts at humor.
Yet again, Starmer proved unable to accurately assess the mood of the public. His commitment to a housing pledge seemed motivated more by its appeal than by its feasibility. It’s just another example of a tone-deaf promise that fell flat.
He continues to repeat this pattern. Instead of uniting the people, Britons find themselves laughing at Starmer rather than with him. He has unwittingly become the punchline, and it seems he remains oblivious to this reality.
