Pat McFadden wants Labour to ‘be disruptors’. But before the government starts thinking like a start-up, we need the Prime Minister to start thinking like an entrepreneur. The post Sophia Falkner: Starmer must pay more attention to Musk but not for the reasons you’d think appeared first on Conservative Home.
Sophia Falkner is a former special advisor in No 10 Downing Street
On Friday last week Sir Keir Starmer told his cabinet they had to be the “disruptors, if you don’t want to be disrupted”
This is a recent recurring theme for Starmer and his right-hand man Pat McFadden who have both declared in speeches and interviews that government must think more like a start-up. It was McFadden who first raised Labour as ‘disruptors’ in a speech in December.
As someone who’s worked both in finance and spent the last two years as a Special Adviser to the Prime Minister in No10, I like the idea that two wildly different sectors – politics and entrepreneurship – have more in common than meets the eye. There are parallels between the political campaigns I’ve worked on and working for start-ups – the long hours, amorphous responsibilities, and a bit more trial and error than anyone would like to admit. But the more I see of Starmer’s leadership, the more I think McFadden is getting ahead of himself. Before the government starts thinking like a start-up, we need the Prime Minister to start thinking like an entrepreneur.
Leadership should not be an issue for Starmer.
He has spent nearly a decade at the helm of major organisations – the CPS and the Labour Party. His CV is however notably sparse on private sector experience, having spent more time fighting corporates than working for them. While this hasn’t stopped him ingratiating himself with business elites – declaring he preferred Davos to Westminster – he should try imitating them first. Because on leadership, he still has a lot to learn.
Take delegation: Keir Starmer’s approach can be more accurately described as outsourcing. That’s why No10 were blind-sided by the Schools Bill, just as they were bounced into the Heathrow expansion. Starmer’s rubber-stamp approach to economic affairs has led to a number of avoidable mistakes, notably scrapping the Winter Fuel Allowance. Sensible, some may say, to let No11 get on with the job, but in light of the Chancellor’s track record of economic and political misjudgements (her £28 billion policy was our most used weapon at the despatch box), that was never going to end well.
Sir Keir also famously outsourced his plan for government to his former Chief of Staff, Sue (soon to be Baroness) Gray, only to discover upon entering No10, that there was in fact no plan at all. While much of the focus has been on Sue Gray herself, a serious question remains as to how on earth it took Starmer over a year to realise that Gray’s plan for government did not actually exist.
Starmer won’t want to hear this, but he should turn to Elon Musk for lessons in how to delegate. Musk after all managed to run multiple mega-cap companies while playing a central role in the US Presidential election. His approach is demanding and rigorous: an xAI employee revealed Musk spent 18 hours reviewing five minute presentations and giving feedback to every single member of the team.
The lesson for Starmer is that assigning responsibilities is just the first step. Continued and active engagement is as important. With just a fraction of the effort Musk puts into delegation, Starmer may have been able to prevent a number of the political errors of his first six months as Prime Minister.
It is not just in execution, but in strategy, that Starmer’s leadership is clearly lacking. Entrepreneurs thrive on risk, but Starmer prefers to play it safe. It’s why he pursues short-term tactics over long-term strategy. It means he may have sacrificed a second term in pursuit of his first.
Ruling out tax rise after tax rise during the election campaign was the safe option for a party used to opposition. But Starmer’s reluctance to risk losing a few Labour seats by taking a softer line on tax, when his victory was near enough guaranteed, means he now has no room for manoeuvre. Boxed in by his own pledges, Starmer felt compelled to raise employers’ National Insurance, one of the worst taxes for his ‘number one mission’ of growth. It is a classic example of short-term tactics over long-term strategy. As was his approach to WASPI women. Starmer’s risk aversion may have eased his journey to No10, but taking more pain along the way would have left him in a much stronger position today.
Starmer does still have four more years to improve. Having come to power on bold promises of change, there is an opportunity for him to learn from those who have actually delivered it. And he needn’t look to the billionaire techies for this, it is found amongst start-up founders and small business owners alike: an open-minded and creative approach to problem-solving.
Starmer’s approach is the opposite: he stands by international court rulings without daring to question whether the underlying conventions still achieve their intended objectives, or are even in our best interest. Mr Rules’ (as a Cabinet colleague once described Starmer) unwillingness to challenge convention and his rigid adherence to established norms, such as those espoused by international courts, quangos, and commissions, shows an inability to engage in the creative thinking these times demand.
It is not just in the pursuit of the objective, but in the setting of those objectives, that Starmer falls short. Of Starmer’s five missions, only one (make Britain a clean energy superpower) represents an ambition to achieve something that has not been done before. He has elevated in other missions what most would consider to be the basic duties of the state.
The pursuit of big, audacious goals should not be seen as the purview of inventive entrepreneurs. Argentina’s President Milei demonstrates how reforming politicians can embody these characteristics too. No one expects Starmer to turn into the Steve Jobs of British politics, but he must adopt a more creative and open minded approach to deliver the change he promised and hold Reform at bay.
Clearly not all parts of government should be run like a business – I like the idea of children learning music, even though the return on investment is not as high as maths. But when it comes to the qualities of great leaders, the lines between the private and public sector are more blurred. Starmer may not have attended Davos this year but should reflect on the qualities of those in business that did.
The post Sophia Falkner: Starmer must pay more attention to Musk but not for the reasons you’d think appeared first on Conservative Home.
