Euan McColm: It’s a vision thing – and sitting duck Sir Keir Starmer does not have it

Then vice-president to political alpha Ronald Reagan, Bush was considered a dull pragmatist. What, the magazine wished to know, were the big ideas that would define him?

In reply, Bush spoke of “the vision thing”, three words which have since become a useful shorthand in the world of politics. Leaders live or die on whether or not they possess and are able to articulate it.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer does not have the vision thing and he’s begun to pay a heavy price for that inadequacy.

The crisis that continues to engulf Starmer’s premiership germinated in the space where the vision should have been.

Last July, Starmer led his party to a landslide victory, securing a parliamentary majority of 174. Just 16 months later he’s fighting for his political life. While he struggled to define clearly what “Starmerism” might be, the political capital accrued by Labour during the last years of chaotic Conservative rule evaporated.

A decision last week by allies of Starmer’s to brief against senior Labour figures was supposed to be a show of strength but revealed only weakness.

On Tuesday, “sources close to the PM” told Westminster lobby reporters that he was ready to take on any challenges to his leadership.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting was singled out as someone who was on manoeuvres.

And then things got very spicy, indeed.

Rather than simply taking his punishment beating, Streeting came out fighting.

During TV and radio interviews on Wednesday morning, he said the suggestion he was planning to challenge for his party’s leadership were “self-defeating nonsense”. The Health Secretary urged Starmer to sack whoever was responsible for suggesting he was a disloyal plotter and and said he could see no circumstances in which he would try to topple the PM.

By forcing Streeting to defend himself, Starmer’s aides allowed him to display skills the Prime Minister sorely lacks.

With good humour and righteous indignation, the Health Secretary showed himself unflappable and focused. Which are not things one can credibly say about the Prime Minister.

By Wednesday evening, briefings from Downing Street sources had developed a different tone. Starmer had apologised to Streeting for briefings which took place without his blessing or, indeed, his knowledge.

Too little, too late, I think.

Over recent days, the focus has fallen on the Prime Minister’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, with a number of Labour MPs alleging he was the catalyst for this crisis and that he must go from Downing Street.

Allies of McSweeney’s have rallied round, denying he had any involvement, insisting he’s going nowhere. Starmer has declared his confidence in his top aide.

We are currently in the denial stage of McSweeney’s political demise.

There is no way in which he can continue in his role without causing further division in the Westminster Labour group. His allies may brief all they wish but the facts are clear: McSweeney runs a Downing Street operation that, by attacking Streeting, created this crisis.

Perhaps McSweeney knew nothing about the specific attacks on Streeting but, even if that is so, the buck stops with him. If he green-lit the half-arsed plot against Streeting, he should go for causing chaos. If he did not, he should go for failing to have a grip on the Downing Street machine he’s employed to control.

Ultimately, though, responsibility for this entertaining mess lies with Starmer who, increasingly, looks like our dog-that-caught-the-car Prime Minister. Having led Labour to victory last year, Starmer has failed to articulate a clear and energising vision for the United Kingdom.

Instead, after hitting the ground limping, he has stumbled from crisis to crisis.

An announcement within weeks of Labour taking power that the universal winter fuel allowance for pensioners was to be abolished showed the first hints that Starmer lacked the political nous required for a successful premiership.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting that there should be any sacred cows when it comes to government spending. Indeed, in the case of the winter fuel allowance, there was a strong case to be made for the decision to introduce means-testing.

But Starmer did not make that case. He did not articulate clearly how the redistribution of funds away from wealthier pensioners (and there are plenty of those) was the right thing to do. Instead, he offered little more than bromides about difficult decisions.

After years of chaos under the Tories, Starmer’s great selling point was his reputation as a steady leader. Not only did he offer a calmer alternative to the Conservatives, he had dragged his own party out of the ditch into which his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, had steered it.

So, it was hardly a surprise when Labour won last year’s election. The promise of a ship-steadying government was hugely appealing.

But the ship still lists through storms generated by the Prime Minister and his team.

Morgan McSweeney will have to go. Those are the laws of the political jungle and he knows that as well as everyone else.

Every day that Starmer continues to stand by his chief of staff will further exacerbate division in the cabinet. That the Prime Minister seems not to see this evident truth is entirely in keeping with the bad decisions and unforced errors of the last year.

Starmer’s team went out fighting on his behalf this week. They wanted to secure his position as a PM and present him as a strong, decisive leader. Instead, they further exposed his lack of political skill and the complete absence of that vision thing.

Sir Keir Starmer is now a sitting duck and Wes Streeting looks by far the most credible candidate to replace him.