7 UK prime ministers in 10 years: Why the leadership keeps collapsing

With British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announcing his resignation, the United Kingdom is set to welcome yet another occupant of 10 Downing Street.

Starmer's exit means Britain is on track to have seven prime ministers in the ten years since the Brexit referendum of June 2016. It also means the country could see its fifth premier in roughly four years, a rate of leadership turnover never seen before in British politics.

For much of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, Britain was associated with durable governments and leaders who often remained in office for many years. Margaret Thatcher governed from 1979 until 1990, while Tony Blair led the country from 1997 until 2007.

Starmer's resignation therefore represents more than the fall of a single government leader. It serves as the latest chapter in the ever-long story about how Brexit transformed British politics, weakened traditional parties and made the office of prime minister increasingly vulnerable.

More from Explainers

India: The history they studied in boxes

India and Europe move closer amid Trumpian turbulence

Why did Starmer's premiership end?

Starmer announced on Monday that he would step down after concluding that he no longer enjoyed sufficient support within the governing Labour Party to lead it into the next general election, scheduled for 2029.

Speaking outside Downing Street, Starmer acknowledged that Labour lawmakers had reached a judgement about his future and that he would not attempt to resist that conclusion.

"The question my party is asking now is whether I am best placed to lead us into the next general election. I have heard the answer from my parliamentary party to that question and I accept that answer with good grace," he said.

The resignation followed months during which pressure steadily escalated around his leadership. Although Labour had won a commanding victory in the 2024 general election, the government struggled to maintain political momentum.

Several developments combined to weaken Starmer's position. A controversy surrounding political adviser Peter Mandelson became particularly damaging after details emerged concerning Mandelson's historical connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

While Starmer removed Mandelson from his role, the affair undermined Labour's claims of integrity and accountability.

At the same time, public dissatisfaction with the government began to grow. Many accused the administration of lacking a clear strategic direction, while a number of domestic policy decisions attracted opposition.

Among the issues that generated political controversy were changes affecting some winter fuel payments and the government's approach to prison overcrowding, including the use of early-release measures.

Compounding these problems was the continued rise of Reform UK under Nigel Farage. The party's electoral advances in local contests during 2025 and 2026 alarmed Labour MPs, particularly those representing constituencies where support for traditional parties appeared increasingly fragile.

The decisive moment arrived following Andy Burnham's successful return to Westminster. Burnham, who had served as mayor of Greater Manchester, won a parliamentary by-election in Makerfield and immediately emerged as a potential alternative leader capable of reviving Labour's fortunes.

Faced with mounting calls for change and the prospect of a prolonged internal confrontation, Starmer opted to step aside rather than engage in a bitter leadership struggle.

His announcement also revealed a more personal side of a politician often criticised by opponents for appearing overly technocratic or detached.

"When I leave the biggest job in the country I will spend more time on the most important job, being the best husband I can to my fantastic wife Vic who has been a rock by my side through good times and bad, and being the best dad I can to my beautiful children who are my pride and my joy."

Will Andy Burnham be the next Labour leader and PM?

The 56-year-old politician's return to Parliament generated immediate excitement among Labour lawmakers.

Following his Makerfield victory, Burnham entered the House of Commons to applause from members of his party, although opposition lawmakers also greeted him with occasional jeers. One individual shouted, "He's not the Messiah."

Burnham subsequently completed the formal process of taking his parliamentary seat by pledging allegiance to UK's King Charles, a necessary constitutional step before participating fully in parliamentary proceedings.

The speed with which support consolidated around Burnham has led many Labour figures to believe that the leadership transition could be relatively smooth. Former UK Health Minister Wes Streeting, who had been regarded as a possible contender himself, quickly endorsed Burnham, reducing the likelihood of a prolonged contest.

Labour's timetable provides for nominations to begin on July 9 and conclude later in the month. Party officials expect a new leader to be installed before Parliament returns in September.

However, should Burnham secure overwhelming backing, the process could conclude much sooner.

Financial markets appeared to welcome signs of an orderly transition. Following indications that Burnham's path to the leadership might be relatively uncontested, the pound strengthened against several currencies and British government bonds gained ground.

Yet significant challenges await whoever succeeds Starmer. Burnham has repeatedly spoken about the need for sweeping change and reducing pressure on household finances.

Nevertheless, he has not yet presented detailed positions covering key issues such as foreign policy, defence spending or broader economic strategy.

Those uncertainties come at a time when Britain faces a difficult fiscal environment. Borrowing costs remain elevated compared with other major advanced economies, while economic growth has remained subdued.

The government continues to confront competing demands for investment, particularly in public services and defence, while also facing pressure to control spending and debt levels.

Farage wasted little time in responding to the political transition. "I've had enough of waiting around. Britain needs change - real change, not another washed-up has-been shoved into place by the uniparty," Farage said in a statement.

Are we still looking at echoes of Brexit?

Many analysts cite the root cause of instability as the Brexit referendum held on June 23, 2016. The vote produced a narrow but historic outcome. By a margin of 52 per cent to 48 per cent, British voters chose to leave the European Union after more than four decades of membership.

The result immediately ended David Cameron's premiership. Having called the referendum while campaigning for Britain to remain within the bloc, Cameron resigned the day after the vote.

That decision began a chain of political events that continues to shape Britain a decade later.

The Brexit campaign itself drew upon deep public frustrations. Supporters of withdrawal argued that leaving the EU would restore national control over legislation, borders and economic decision-making.

The campaign's message frequently appealed to emotion and national identity.

Among its most memorable remarks came from Boris Johnson, who said shortly before the referendum, "We can see the sunlit meadows beyond. I believe we would be mad not to take this once-in-a-lifetime chance to walk through that door."

The years that followed, however, proved considerably more complicated than many campaign slogans had suggested.

Negotiations with Brussels became lengthy and contentious. Britain formally departed the European Union on January 31, 2020, before completing an eleven-month transition period.

Throughout that process, successive prime ministers struggled to satisfy competing political demands.

Theresa May inherited the task of negotiating Britain's withdrawal but repeatedly failed to secure parliamentary approval for her Brexit arrangements. Her inability to unite Parliament eventually led to her resignation in 2019.

Johnson replaced May and sought to deliver Brexit through a revised agreement and a subsequent trade deal with the European Union. While he succeeded in taking Britain out of the bloc, his administration later became engulfed in ethical controversies and political scandals that ultimately ended his premiership.

Liz Truss then assumed office but lasted only 49 days after financial markets reacted negatively to her government's economic programme.

Rishi Sunak followed, restoring a degree of stability and improving relations with European partners, though without fundamentally altering Britain's post-Brexit settlement. He later resigned after the Conservatives suffered a major defeat in the 2024 election.

Starmer promised a fresh start and a reset in Britain's relationship with Europe. Yet despite pursuing closer engagement, he stopped short of advocating re-entry into the European Union's single market or reopening the Brexit question directly.

As he leaves office, many of the issues exposed by Brexit remain unresolved.

How did Brexit fracture Britain's political parties?

For decades, voting patterns in Britain followed relatively predictable lines. Labour traditionally enjoyed strong support among working-class communities, while the Conservatives performed well among middle-class and wealthier voters.

But since Brexit, those alignments have become far less reliable. Brexit created new political identities that frequently cut across traditional economic divisions.

Questions surrounding immigration, sovereignty, national identity and Britain's relationship with Europe began influencing voting behaviour in ways that older party structures struggled to accommodate.

The Conservative Party experienced significant internal upheaval as disagreements over the nature of Brexit heated up. Politicians advocating a softer departure or closer ties with Europe increasingly found themselves marginalised.

Labour faced its own dilemmas. Although many of its supporters favoured maintaining close links with Europe, party leaders feared reigniting divisions by pushing too aggressively for renewed integration.

At the same time, voters increasingly explored alternatives beyond Britain's two dominant parties.

Reform UK emerged as a major beneficiary of public frustration. Led by Farage, the party successfully channelled dissatisfaction with immigration policy and broader concerns about the political establishment.

The Green Party and the Liberal Democrats also gained massive support among voters searching for alternatives to Labour and the Conservatives.

As these shifts accelerated, maintaining broad electoral coalitions became increasingly difficult for governing parties. Prime ministers found themselves balancing competing interests within increasingly diverse voter bases, often alienating one group while attempting to satisfy another.

Why are UK PMs easier to remove?

Unlike presidential systems, where removing a head of government generally requires extraordinary legal procedures, Britain's prime minister serves only so long as they retain the confidence of their party and Parliament.

The public does not directly elect the prime minister. Instead, the office is held by whoever leads the party capable of commanding a majority in the House of Commons.

As a result, political careers can unravel rapidly once colleagues begin to doubt a leader's electoral value.

Over recent decades, both Labour and Conservative leadership rules have evolved in ways that make challenges easier to organise. MPs and party members possess substantial influence over leadership contests, creating constant pressure on incumbents whose popularity declines.

This phenomenon has become particularly evident since Brexit.

Cameron resigned after losing the referendum. May fell because she could not unite Parliament behind her Brexit strategy. Johnson was driven out following ministerial resignations linked to ethical controversies.

Truss departed after financial turmoil. Sunak resigned following electoral defeat. Starmer has now stepped aside under pressure from his own parliamentary colleagues.

Is it the British economy?

Alongside institutional and political changes, Britain's economic difficulties have only put more pressure on successive governments.

Businesses have had to adapt to new trading arrangements with European markets. While Brexit is not solely responsible for weak growth, it has coincided with a series of major global disruptions.

The Covid-19 pandemic created enormous economic and fiscal challenges. Russia's invasion of Ukraine contributed to energy market volatility and inflationary pressures. Conflict involving Iran added further uncertainty to the international environment.

Together, these factors have complicated efforts by successive governments to improve living standards and public services.

Is it dealing with immigration?

One of Brexit's big promises involved greater control over migration. Yet debate has only escalated as migration patterns changed. Net migration reached more than 900,000 in 2023 before declining sharply to approximately 171,000 the following year.

Despite those changes, immigration remains among the most politically sensitive subjects in Britain. Growing dissatisfaction has also affected public trust.

Surveys indicate rising cynicism toward political institutions and elected representatives. In some instances, anti-immigration demonstrations and street unrest have followed crimes either committed by, or incorrectly attributed to, immigrants.

The tone of response has hardened considerably compared with the period before Brexit.

Do Britons want to rejoin the EU?

Ten years after the referendum, public attitudes toward Brexit itself have evolved.

Polling suggests a growing number of Britons now believe leaving the European Union was a mistake. An Ipsos survey found that 52 per cent of respondents would support rejoining the EU, while 33 per cent opposed such a move.

That sentiment was visible in London recently when hundreds of demonstrators carrying European Union flags participated in a march advocating renewed membership.

Yet Brexit remains politically hazardous territory.

Many voters have grown weary of the arguments that dominated British politics for years, and neither Labour nor the Conservatives appears eager to reopen the issue. Rejoining the bloc would also require lengthy negotiations and agreement from EU member states.

As Britain prepares for another change of leadership, the legacy of Brexit remains impossible to ignore.

Also Watch:

With inputs from agencies