Starmer frames global progressive challenge as Burnham rift and digital ID policy loom

Sir Keir Starmer used Friday’s Global Progressive Action Conference to press centre-left allies to confront what he described as a defining choice of the era: a politics of predatory grievance versus patriotic renewal. In a speech to Labour’s global sister parties, he said it is time to look ourselves in the mirror and recognise where parties have allowed themselves to shy away from working people’s concerns. The remarks cast Labour as a party seeking to mobilize a global progressive coalition against Reform UK and its international equivalents, while outlining a reaffirmed, policy-driven path forward for the British opposition.

The conference comes as Labour seeks to translate a challenging domestic mood into a coherent international blueprint. Starmer framed the challenge as bigger than Britain’s borders, arguing that the left worldwide must offer an alternative to a rightward political culture that he described as fostering grievance rather than renewal. He contrasted what he cast as a credible, national renewal agenda with an insurgent Reform UK movement that has unsettled Labour MPs and raised questions about the party’s ability to articulate a clear economic strategy. The plan to present a defining policy on digital identity has become a focal point of the debate, with the prime minister positioning compulsory digital ID as a practical tool to curb illegal work and immigration and to sharpen political divides with opponents. The remarks followed a swirl of domestic headlines—one batch about the Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, and another about the government’s digital ID proposals—creating a backdrop in which personnel, policy and ambition intersect.

Observers note that Starmer’s irritation with Burnham has become a recurring undercurrent in the Labour leadership tussle. Burnham, who is popular with some Labour MPs and constituencies, has given high-profile interviews and policy pitches that have alarmed others in the parliamentary party. In public and private exchanges, the prime minister has signaled frustration at Burnham’s public posture, and Starmer’s reference to historic Conservative leadership missteps—couched as a warning that backsliding on economic credibility could risk a similar fate—has underscored the tensions inside Labour as the party grapples with its direction.

The digital ID policy looms large in this dynamic. Starmer’s team has signaled that the compulsory scheme would serve as a tangible policy demonstration of his premiership’s definitional power, showing how Labour would address illegal working and, by extension, illegal immigration. In his conference remarks, he linked the policy to the need for a clear, defendable agenda that could distinguish Labour from opponents in Britain and abroad. The attendees at the conference’s session included Anthony Albanese, the Australian prime minister, and a figure described as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the briefing notes accompanying the event, though that detail sits alongside broader coverage of international guests.

Reaction to the plan has been mixed among Labour’s traditional opponents and supporters. Reform UK, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party have voiced strong objections to the compulsory digital ID, arguing it is an overreach or privacy-risk policy. The Conservative position has been more cautious, with some officials calling the move a potential gimmick while others leave room for further persuasion. The policy’s fate will likely influence Labour’s perceived policy credibility as the party seeks to define its post-election direction amid ongoing debates inside the parliamentary party about how to communicate a coherent identity and strategy.

Yet, beyond the specifics of digital ID, the conference is framed by a broader strategic aim: to unify a global progressive project around a shared critique of what Starmer calls a “predatory grievance” politics and to present Labour as the party capable of delivering economic and social renewal. The emphasis on “patriotic renewal” is positioned as a counterpoint to the insurgent momentum Labour sees in Reform UK, a dynamic that has intensified the internal debate about how far Labour should go in courting broad working-class sentiment while maintaining a distinctive, centrist policy trajectory.

The club of world leaders and activists gathered at the conference is meant to reflect a broader realignment of left-leaning parties facing similar challenges: rising populist pressures, concerns about immigration and labour markets, and demands for visible, evidence-based policy responses. Starmer’s message to this global audience, according to his team, is that Labour will not retreat into defensive positioning but will instead offer concrete solutions and a clear narrative about the future of work, social protection and national identity. The emphasis on policy specificity—especially the digital ID framework—signals an attempt to translate campaign rhetoric into governance-ready proposals that can withstand scrutiny from both domestic critics and international observers.

The immediate political test for Starmer will be whether he can sustain the momentum of a defined policy stance while managing the strain within his own ranks over leadership and messaging. The Burnham episode highlights the pressure points: how a party navigates internal dissent during a moment of strategic recalibration, and how it translates such tensions into a persuasive, unified front that can stand up to Reform UK and its overseas equivalents.

As the world’s centre-left cross-pollinates ideas and strategies, Labour’s ability to present a credible, policy-driven alternative to the current government—and to its own internal critics—will shape not only the party’s electoral prospects but also the broader discourse about the future of progressive politics on the world stage. The Global Progressive Action Conference thus becomes a litmus test for Starmer’s leadership: whether he can turn an international stage into domestic policy momentum, while keeping a fragile coalition inside the party from fraying under pressure.