Sarah Stook: What can a PM do these days to last a full five years?

Sarah Stook is a Beat Reporter for Elections Daily and has written for a number of online publications.

‘Therefore, I shall resign the Presidency effective at noon tomorrow. Vice President Ford will be sworn in as President at that hour in this office.’

When President Richard Nixon gave his landmark resignation speech on the 8th of August 1974, it sent shockwaves around the United States. Never before had a president resigned.

Eight had died in office, but none had resigned, even in the toughest of circumstances. In the fifty-two years since, no president has done it again. Not Ronald Reagan during the Iran-Contra Affair. Not Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky Scandal. Not Joe Biden during the speculation about his health.

Compare that to the United Kingdom.

Five PMs have resigned this century- Tony Blair, David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. At the time of writing, it looks like a sixth resignation may come in the form of the beleaguered Keir Starmer. The PMs who did not resign- Gordon Brown and Rishi Sunak, did not even finish a full prime ministerial term. Indeed, David Cameron was the last to make it a full five years, and that was a decade ago.

The question remains: what can a PM do to last a full five years, or at least make it to the next election?

It is a puzzling question to say the least, for it requires a sustained level of popularity that seems to elude the men and women of Downing Street. Both Johnson and Starmer led their parties to electoral landslides, yet the spectre of unpopularity did not take long to appear. Even Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister for eleven years and the entirety of the 1980s, had to face the music and leave. We can perhaps understand the case of Mrs. Thatcher, as she did see three elections in her time, but it was three years for Johnson and could be only two for Starmer.

To answer, we must perhaps look at the reasons why PMs have resigned.

For some, it was a result of health reasons- Winston Churchill suffered a severe stroke and Harold Macmillan suffered illness, though truthfully he would have probably been forced out anyway. For others, it was that they were simply exhausted – exit stage left, Harold Wilson.

These sympathetic reasons have not been the case for nearly forty years. Margaret Thatcher became increasingly unpopular within her own party, and the Poll Tax certainly helped finish her premiership off. Of the five PMs who have resigned this century:

1. Tony Blair– a number of factors contributed to Blair’s record unpopularity, such as the Iraq War and hostility within his own cabinet. He left in June 2007, handing the premiership and Labour leadership to Gordon Brown in what was essentially a coronation.
2. David Cameron – was on the losing side of the European Union referendum. Resigned believing he no longer had a mandate.
3. Theresa May – her draft withdrawals from the EU were thrice defeated, the party performed poorly in the European elections and the Conservatives wanted to boot her out. Jumped before she was pushed.
4. Boris Johnson – Johnson’s premiership went into freefall in 2022. The loss of two by-elections, the Chris Pincher scandal and mass resignations forced Johnson’s hand. He announced he would resign once a new leader was decided in September.
5. Liz Truss – Truss’ short premiership saw her oversee the death and funeral of Elizabeth II and a mini-budget so unpopular that she fired her Chancellor. She left office and became the shortest-serving PM ever, lasting only fifty days.

With the exception of David Cameron, who it can be argued could have remained, the rest were essentially forced out by their own party and public unpopularity. Many Prime Ministers are unpopular, but is it fair that it’s essentially down to a few hundred MPs of their own party?

Well, that is the parliamentary system. It is a system of contrasts.

Prime Ministers are much more likely to be held accountable for their own failures, simply because the party holds more power than in a different political system. Truss found that out the hard way. Compare this to the American system, where presidents are not head of their party and are much less beholden to them. All presidents who have gone under impeachment hearings- Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, have survived- indicted by the House, saved by the Senate. Is it because the president is Head of State, whereas the PM is only Head of the Government? Either way, that pressure is stronger in our nation than it is across the pond.

Still, that does not exactly help stability. When an American votes, it’s almost certain that their president will make it to the next election. The last time this did not occur was over fifty years ago. Meanwhile, we can go through Prime Ministers like we go through tissues during a cold.

That is, however, the price that we pay in a parliamentary system. It’s a system that priorities accountability at the risk of stability. Even then, it is still a stretch to say there is no stability, because the country hasn’t collapsed. Even if Parliament collapsed, we have a monarchy that has held firm since 1660- not even the Abdication Crisis of 1936 could bring it down.

This article is assuming that Keir Starmer is probably not going to make it until 2029. Even if he does- and I will eat my hat if he does- there will be a number of PMs in my lifetime that don’t. If he does make it to 2029 in one piece, I will have seen eight prime ministers in thirty-one years of life, compared to five US Presidents (assuming Trump finishes this term), four of whom will have served two full terms. It’s a remarkable contrast, even if we aren’t quite as trigger-happy about elections as Israel or Australia are.

This once again begs the question: what can a PM do to stay a full five years?

Well, it seems that he or she needs to be scandal-free, or at least able to keep their head during hard times.

They must also remain generally popular.

Scandal-free is stretching it, but it is probably harder to remain generally popular.

A PM could manage world peace, but someone is not going to like him. Some issues remain too fragmented. One only has to look at how divisive the Israel-Palestine Conflict is, with the pro-Palestine crowd and Muslims in particular looking away from Labour to the tantalising Green Party. Both major parties are hemorrhaging votes to Reform, and Reform are slowly losing support to Restore. Theresa May promised strong and stable leadership, but can such a thing exist in these fractured times?

In America, no president will probably ever reach George W. Bush’s 90 per cent approval rating following 90 per cent.

I’d wager that it is no different over here.

If a PM wanted to get a 90 per cent approval rating and keep it across at least four or so years, they would probably need to either bring back Woolworth’s Pick and Mix or ban VAR. I don’t see either of those things happening, and I’m thus still searching for success in a parliamentary system.