LONDON — Labour’s celebrated former prime minister Tony Blair resigned after a decade of warring with his chancellor. Keir Starmer is allegedly there after 16 months, and he doesn’t even have a Gordon Brown to worry about.

Downing Street was plunged into chaos on Tuesday night, after Starmer’s allies briefed anonymously that he could face — and would defy — a leadership challenge by Wes Streeting, his ambitious and telegenic 42-year-old health secretary.

“People are just astonished,” said one minister, granted anonymity, like others in this report, to speak openly. “[The briefers] have lost their minds. This is like the last days of Rome, in their heads.”

For many in Labour, the objection isn’t that this is happening at all. It’s that it is happening too early.

It is true that Labour MPs have talked privately, but inexactly, for months about a change of leader. Since Starmer won a landslide on a center-left ticket in July 2024, his administration has been beset by ethics scandals, communication failures, personnel changes, and the surge of Nigel Farage’s populist Reform UK, which has put the issue of immigration at the top of the political agenda.

Yet many remain unconvinced that a challenge to Starmer’s leadership would reach a critical mass just yet – even after a budget on Nov. 26, which is expected to raise income tax in a breach of his manifesto.

While Streeting and Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood are mooted as challengers from the party’s “right,” they each face a battle to keep their own seats at the next general election and could struggle to win the wide support of Labour members. There is still no agreed contender from the “soft” left flank after Starmer’s former deputy, Angela Rayner, resigned over a housing scandal.

By exposing what critics call “paranoia” and a lack of grip in No. 10, however, the briefing itself underscored expectations that Starmer could be challenged after local elections in May 2026, if they go badly.

While the briefing appeared designed to flush out and humiliate plotters, seasoned Labour aides pointed out that Streeting’s denials — and Starmer’s promise to fight on — will mean nothing whenever the political reality takes over.

‘We’re through the looking glass’

Meanwhile, the briefing backfired explosively inside Labour. Aides and ministers were astonished to see a rolling “bubble” story catapulted to the top of the news agenda, legitimizing speculation about a PM who once promised Brits he would “tread more lightly on your lives.”

“We’re through the looking glass now,” added a (once ultra loyal) MP who won their seat in 2024. “I don’t think anyone knows where this ends.”

One long-serving former Labour adviser said: “It has created this sense that there’s a crisis, and I’m genuinely not sure that there was one.” Another added: “Keir Starmer, the midfielder, knows two-footing players at random is not a show of strength — it’s a show of total panic.”

Streeting, who denied plotting in a pre-arranged round of media interviews on Wednesday, turned the fire on No. 10’s “toxic culture” and said the briefers should be sacked.

Despite this, there are still allies of the prime minister, said one minister, who believe Streeting or his allies are “lining up” frontbenchers who would resign en masse if and when the PM’s authority breaks down.

One No. 10 adviser said challengers had been “pitching hard,” adding: “Would you get a reaction this big [from Starmer’s allies] if it were something small?” 

A second government adviser likened the situation to Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, who — unlike Streeting — pitched openly in September about the need to change course, only to be silenced by an internal backlash. The Burnham saga “focused minds,” they said. “You know what they say about smoke and fire. They might as well lay down a marker.”

Others were more skeptical. One well-connected frontbencher said they didn’t believe “in a million years” that Streeting’s allies had been lining up colleagues to resign.

Comms failure in No. 10

The prevailing view among Labour figures is that the briefing was a communications cock-up. Part of this may be linked to the two stages in which the story developed.

The first stage was an anonymous briefing to the Times on Monday, by four of Starmer’s allies, that he would face down any leadership challenge when it came.

A briefing then followed on Tuesday to other journalists that put Streeting’s name in the frame directly. It was this second stage that truly lit a fire under the story.

Some in Labour indicated a potential nuance; that while the first stage might have been authorised from inside No. 10, or even sanctioned by Starmer, the second stage was not. 

Starmer insisted on Wednesday that he had “never authorised attacks on Cabinet members” and his press secretary suggested the attack on Streeting had emanated from outside No. 10. However, she declined to say the original briefing – about facing down any potential challenge – was unauthorised, or that it came from outside Downing Street.

“This falls on advisers much more than it falls on politicians,” said a Labour adviser. “I think it’s a total lack of people who know how briefings work.”

Labour aides and politicians pointed the finger (without evidence) at Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff. Starmer said the attacks were unacceptable, but his press secretary — while voicing full confidence in McSweeney — refused to confirm whether a leak inquiry was underway. 

One senior aide even wondered aloud if Peter Mandelson, Britain’s former ambassador to the U.S., whom Starmer sacked in September over his former ties to Jeffrey Epstein, was involved. (They also produced no evidence to back up this theory.)

One person who the briefing does little to hurt is Mahmood, who has seen her profile rise rapidly and won support from key figures in the “Blue Labour” caucus, which focuses on the party’s traditional, working-class right.

Blue Labour figure Maurice Glasman, a peer, told BBC Newsnight: “[Mahmood] is the only one of really genuine quality of the whole lot. But she’s got a job to do. She’s got to stop the boats, she’s got to sort out the prisons. So at the moment, I’m not in favour of any challenge to the Prime Minister.”

The buck stops with the boss

Whoever was responsible — and whoever benefits — some of Starmer’s critics suggest episodes like these could be symptomatic of the way he runs No. 10.

Many of the PM’s senior allies continue to pursue a steady-as-she-goes strategy of promising he will be more visible (despite Starmer not facing a press conference for a month), hearing MPs’ concerns after the 2024 intake complained he was inaccessible, and talking about bread-and-butter issues such as the cost of living.

“It’s really important that we don’t act as if there is a general election in three weeks’ time,” said one Labour official who defended the strategy. “There are billions of opinion polls. You could live your life reading them and changing your policy for tomorrow. Or you can think, we’ve got a big majority and three years and a bit left of the parliament. We need to get on and do stuff, and then be judged on it.”

Starmer’s press secretary said Wednesday: “The PM is focused every single day on renewing our country after 14 years of failure. This Labour government was elected with a huge mandate to look for change. That is what he his team, his entire cabinet, his entire government, are focused on every day.”

Yet clearly, the briefings of recent days suggest that some around Starmer are reading the headlines and playing politics. Some who have worked closely with Starmer complain of overlapping strategies across government, for example, on how far to go in condemning the effects of Brexit. Internal critics complain that the PM outsources some key policy and strategic thinking without sending an unequivocal message of what he wants.

“Quite a lot happens without his say so,” said another 2024 intake MP. “Or he’s told a version of what’s happening, which he may agree to but it’s not the political reality.”

This has been exacerbated by the fact that Starmer, a former bureaucrat who is not from one of Labour’s traditional factions, does not have an ideological caucus of MPs and aides he can turn to.

And after staff churn, Starmer also has few aides remaining who came into No. 10 because of personal loyalty or years of experience with him.

Two aides pointed specifically to the departure in September of Steph Driver, his loyal and long-term head of communications. “This would never happen if Steph was still there,” said one.

What happens next feels uncertain. What is sure is that parallels with the past do not apply.

In many ways, Starmer modelled his operation on Tony Blair’s — pursuing overarching “missions” and hiring a procession of advisers from the last government.

Yet the two are not alike. Labour veterans remark that for all the infighting with Brown, Blair sent his government a clear signal from the top about what he wanted. Starmer, at least today, is a victim of briefing beyond his control. Whether he can follow in Blair’s footsteps will depend on his ability to grip it.

Annabelle Dickson and Esther Webber contributed reporting.