Keir Starmer’s first 100 days – how much worse can it get?

But let us stick with Sir Keir for now. Those freebies scarcely helped. We tend to prefer a Prime Minister who buys his own specs. Then there is the Downing Street internal squabbling which resulted in the resignation of Sue Gray as Chief of Staff, relinquishing a salary bigger than the PM’s in the by-going. Not a good look.

Although, again, I doubt if such melodrama has all that much impact on the fretful family in Fife, battling to feed their kids and heat their home.

Read more by Brian Taylor

• We can, we must, find a solution to conflict in the Middle East
• Could new Scottish Tory leader cut a budget deal with John Swinney?

Which brings me to the economy. Labour came to power on a platform of change. Or, rather, Change – very definitely Upper Case. Folk just aren’t feeling it.

OK, so there were caveats. Change would take time. Change was non-specific. Change meant replacing the Tories. Change meant… On top of which, the withdrawal of Winter Fuel Payment from most pensioners. The anger is tangible. One can almost taste it in the chilly air.

Now, I get the concept. The early narrative was that the PM and the Chancellor faced tough choices on our behalf. That the economy was wrecked, not just broken. Those wicked Tories.

I believe Labour saw the Winter Fuel Payment as a powerful gesture. Its removal was a declaration of intent, a symbol of seriousness. Would they dare? It nestled within the narrative; that things would get worse before they got better. That the UK now had grimly determined leaders. In charge. In control.

Snag is it landed in a stagnant pool of disquiet. Folk were anxious and discontented already. Covid, global conflict, a stalled economy. And among the biggest worries of all? Fuel bills.

There is a more fundamental issue. Sir Keir Starmer was never really popular in the first place, not even when winning a big majority in the Commons. Folk did not fall in love with Labour. They fell in loathe with the Tories. Anything to get them out.

Sir Keir was the Change recipient. In Scotland, there was an added dimension. Voters were also growing weary of the incumbent SNP. Their years in power, their policy problems, their internal turmoil. Change, anyone? So Sir Keir has not had a notably calamitous first hundred days. He was never the poster boy in the first place.

Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar faces difficult times (Image: Jane Barlow)

Glance back with me. At least, Sir Keir has the edge on Liz Truss who failed to last 100 days. Rishi Sunak cooled the markets, post-Truss. Look back further. Prime Minister Brown? Not Flash, just Gordon. Blair? A glad confident morning, helped by Brown at Number 11.

What matters is delivery. Anas Sarwar, drawing on his dentistry skills, admits there have been “teething problems” but insists change is under way.

Inevitably, many of the actions cited by the Scottish Labour leader are work in progress, such as the National Wealth Fund and GB Energy. Labour’s early big offer is the New Deal for Working People, ending zero hours contracts and improving employee rights.

Again, I get the concept, which fits with Labour ideology and trades union links. On its own, it may be admirable. But businesses are anxious. They fear it may deter companies from hiring new starts. It may, in short, hinder growth.

To quote the Chancellor: “Growing the economy is the number one priority of this Government”. Plus change will not happen in full for up to two years. Perhaps beyond the next Holyrood election.

Meanwhile, the SNP have successfully speared Scottish Labour over winter fuel. In vain does Mr Sarwar try to turn the fire back upon the Tories. The result? Discontent in his own Holyrood ranks. Maybe things had to get worse before they get better – for Labour.

They face Tories in transition, with a new leader in Scotland and a surprising final two candidates to replace Rishi Sunak. And the SNP, of course, have their own problems. Even as John Swinney urges the PM to end austerity and bolster spending, the Auditor General in Scotland argues that what is needed is reform of the NHS and other services.

Still, never mind. The Council of the Nations and Regions will sort it all. Here they come to save the day. Who they? Devolved First Ministers and English mayors, that’s who. All chaired by the Prime Minister. With Sue Gray as Downing Street envoy. (Except she missed the Edinburgh meeting.)

Read more

• Does Glasgow need its own Andy Burnham-style mayor?

• Herald Diary: Maybe now we know what Shakespeare liked to drink

From the very outset of Scottish devolution, Whitehall has been keen to design a UK template to fit the new system of governance. Officials could never quite accept that Scottish devolution had its origins in a Scottish desire for self-government, either partial or whole.

It had to be part of a UK structure – with Whitehall at the core. Hence the sporadic pressure for English regional government, mostly ignored by the populace. Hence too English Votes for English Laws, advanced by David Cameron.

Look, I understand. The governance structure of the UK is imprecise and a source of tension. Westminster and Whitehall, used to being in charge, find that power challenged – by Belfast, Cardiff, Edinburgh. And, yes, by English cities. Although they do not comfortably fit the pattern of devolution – that is, unless somebody gave them legislative powers and made Manchester a nation without telling me.

Still, dialogue is advantageous. However, the discourse which matters is in the run up to the UK Budget later this month – and in the aftermath. Labour can recover from a bumpy 100 days – if they discernibly deliver for the people.

Ditto the SNP – who need to focus on popular concerns. Ditto, since I am a generous soul, every other party. 

Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre - and Dundee United FC