Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The writer, an FT contributing editor, is a former chief economist at the Bank of England
An alien lands in Trafalgar Square uttering the immortal words: “Take me to your leader”. What directions should you give them? To head down Whitehall towards Downing Street? To continue along to Millbank where Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has its new HQ? To bear right to Buckingham Palace? Or perhaps left to Lambeth Palace?
Though the situation is hypothetical, the question is not. Who truly leads Britain? The UK has had six prime ministers in the past decade, almost as many as in the preceding half-century. Another change at the top during 2026 is an even-money bet. The UK is fast becoming the Manchester United of governments (the club has had eight full-time managers in 13 years), and with similarly dismal levels of success.
This degree of churn is as inimical to the effective governance of a nation as it is to a football club. And it is especially true when the nation in question is blighted by deep-seated challenges — anaemic growth, failing public services, widening social divisions and environmental crises. Each requires a long-term reform programme that only stable political leadership can provide.
The challenges have given rise to some clear psephological trends, not just in the UK but across western democracies: erosion of faith in the capacity of political systems to effect change; weaker political ties as electoral nomadism grows; and traditional links disappearing between socio-economic status and voting intentions.
These forces have hollowed out the political centre. In the three largest countries by population in western Europe — Germany, France and the UK — right-wing populists lead the polls. In the fourth — Italy — the populist right is already in power. The UK’s century-long political duopoly has disintegrated since last year’s election as the hard left (Greens) and right (Reform) have eaten into the centre ground.
This poses existential questions. Is the UK’s political system capable of producing the leadership necessary to rise to its mounting challenges? As party allegiances splinter — as this week’s drama amply illustrates — and the revolving door at Number 10 gathers pace, it’s time to ask whether Britain has become ungovernable, just as some are asking whether Manchester United is unmanageable?
At the end of last year, I approached Ipsos to explore these questions. They conducted a survey of more than 2,000 members of the public; the results are sobering. Almost three-quarters believe the UK political system needs improvement, a degree of discontent matching low points from the past. What is different now is the scale of improvement the public believes is needed.
Two-thirds of the public would favour a party leader who listens to alternative views, perhaps those who stand up for ordinary citizens — the populist voice. Almost half think there should be radical change to the status quo. Only a fifth still place value on a party having previous experience of office. This anti-incumbency, anti-establishment sentiment mirrors the rapid rise of new (Reform) and previously fringe (Green) parties on both right and left: the fraction of Reform voters seeking radical change is almost double that of Labour voters.
But what type of change — to the political system or the people operating it? The survey suggests around half the public believe neither is up to the task. While this lack of faith is not new, the degree of discontent is deeper than in past surveys. And while distrusting the system, the public place greater weight on poor personnel.
That begs the question of who might do a better job. Business leaders ranked highest among the public, adding some support to Farage’s belief that governments should bring in more business expertise — a low bar given recent cabinets. Even then, business leaders score only slightly more highly than lawyers, professors and, yes, politicians.
Moreover, while business leaders are favoured by Reform and Conservative voters, they do not rank in the top three among Labour and Green voters. Sir Jim Ratcliffe, one of Britain’s most successful businessmen, has failed to turn the tide at Manchester United. One suspects Alan Sugar would be unlikely to do so in Westminster.
None of the other professions in the poll — from civil servants to doctors to teachers — rank highly, while journalists, pollsters and religious leaders are in the relegation zone. Little need, then, to direct the aliens to Lambeth Palace. Indeed, with “don’t knows” ranking third, the public is plainly unclear who, if indeed anyone, is capable of rising to the challenges of renewal.
They are somewhat clearer on the changes they would like made to the political system. There is very little support for military dictatorship or a government of bureaucrats, lawyers or academics. But there is support for democratic decision-making becoming both more deliberative (for example, through referendums) and localised (through greater devolution).
These views stand in sharp contrast to the UK’s current standing as the most centralised democracy in the western world — post-Brexit, our use of referendums has been stigmatised. After some big talk before the general election, Labour’s appetite for devolution and democratic reform once in power has weakened with its political grip. Given the public’s desire for greater localism and agency in decision-making, this is another missed opportunity.
So who does possess the right skills? The survey did suggest some nostalgic yearning for the past — perhaps a time when Sir Tony Blair bestrode British politics and Sir Alex Ferguson British football. Alas, given the scale of the challenge and public appetite for change, that is no more likely to work for the nation than it would for Manchester United.