In a tumultuous summer for British politics, Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves have found themselves at the center of a fierce debate over the direction of the Labour government and its treatment of the nation’s Baby Boomer generation. As the government marks the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with a high-profile reception in Downing Street’s rose garden, critics and supporters alike are weighing the cost of Starmer’s international ambitions against the domestic challenges facing millions of older Britons.
On August 15, 2025, columnist Richard Littlejohn, writing in the Daily Mail, accused Starmer and Reeves of waging a “war on Baby Boomers,” alleging that the government is targeting those born between 1945 and 1964 with a raft of tax hikes and benefit cuts. According to Littlejohn, the removal of the winter fuel allowance, higher taxes on pensions and inheritance, and proposals to increase council tax and close longstanding tax loopholes all amount to an unprecedented squeeze on retirees. “They intend to squeeze them – us, I’m 71 – until the pips squeak,” Littlejohn wrote, echoing the words of former Labour Chancellor Denis Healey.
Littlejohn’s criticism is rooted in a sense of betrayal. He points out that many retirees have spent decades saving and paying off mortgages, only to find their hard-earned assets under threat from what he describes as a “rapacious Socialist government.” The columnist alleges that Labour’s policies are driven less by necessity and more by resentment toward older generations, particularly those who voted for Brexit or the Conservative Party. He cites the government’s reported plans to tax garden sheds and larger back gardens, and to scrap concessionary bus and rail passes for Boomers while maintaining free travel for the under-22s, as examples of what he calls the “politics of resentment.”
“Labour seems to have a perverse hostility towards the traditional family and the natural human desire to pass on property and wealth to future generations,” Littlejohn wrote. He further claimed that the government’s approach to inheritance tax—freezing thresholds as property values rise and considering the closure of the seven-year gifting loophole—will force many families to sell their homes to meet tax obligations, even though, in his words, “they cannot be described as wealthy by any stretch of the imagination.”
These charges come at a time when Starmer’s government is facing mounting pressure on several fronts. According to The Times, Starmer has spent more time abroad in his first 13 months as prime minister than any of his predecessors this century, logging over 100,000 miles and spending an average of one in every six days outside the UK. This international focus has brought some notable achievements, including a preferential trade deal with the United States and new agreements with France to address cross-Channel migration. Yet, it has also left the government exposed to criticism for neglecting domestic issues.
For many voters, the most pressing of these issues has been the surge in small boat crossings over the English Channel, which surpassed 50,000 since Labour came to power in 2024. While Starmer was busy engaging with world leaders such as US President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, it was left to Baroness Smith, the skills minister, to respond to the domestic crisis. “Wholly unacceptable,” she said of the surge—though she insisted it was not Labour’s fault. This hands-off approach has allowed opposition figures like Kemi Badenoch and shadow cabinet ministers Chris Philp and Robert Jenrick to seize the initiative, traveling to Calais and criticizing what they called “utter farce” and “naivety” in the government’s handling of migration and border security.
Meanwhile, Labour’s efforts to tackle crime—such as the rollout of named neighborhood police officers and the deployment of facial recognition cameras—were overshadowed by controversy when Dame Diana Johnson, the Home Office minister, suggested shopkeepers should not place “high value” items near store entrances because “obviously people will nick” them. Starmer’s absence from these domestic debates has led some in the media and within his own party to dub him “anywhere but here” Keir, questioning whether his focus on foreign affairs has come at the expense of addressing the everyday concerns of British citizens.
Supporters of the prime minister, however, argue that his international engagement is in the national interest. They point to the economic benefits of new trade deals and the diplomatic breakthroughs on migration, arguing that only through direct, sustained efforts on the world stage can Britain secure its future. “World War Three is breaking out internationally: it’s unreasonable for people to expect Keir to be caring about potholes,” one government source quipped to The Times.
Still, the government is not blind to the risks. Inside Downing Street, there is talk of an autumn shake-up to bring in a senior political ally who can “mind the shop” when Starmer is abroad. Names floated include Torsten Bell, the pensions minister, and Baroness Smith, the former home secretary. There are also calls from Labour peer Lord Glasman to split up the Treasury and create a new economic ministry inside No 10, though such radical moves are considered unlikely given the potential market reaction and the need to preserve stability under Chancellor Reeves.
Reeves herself is keen to put the concept of “contribution” at the heart of government policy, signaling that the upcoming budget will focus on rewarding work and reforming the tax and regulatory system. Treasury aides have indicated that, despite persistent inflation—now forecast by the Bank of England to peak at 4 percent next month—better-than-expected GDP figures may allow for a less severe budget than anticipated. Yet, as one cabinet minister told The Times, “These conversations are perfectly interesting but it’s the sort of thing we should have sorted out a year ago. It’s not as if the Labour Party hasn’t been debating these basic points for a century.”
The coming months are likely to test the government further. With heavy losses predicted in next year’s Senedd elections in Wales and local elections in England, and with the cost of living crisis biting hard, Starmer’s leadership will be under scrutiny. In September, he will again be drawn onto the international stage with his promise to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly—another balancing act between global ambition and domestic responsibility.
For Britain’s Boomers, the sense of being caught in the crossfire of generational politics is palpable. As Littlejohn put it, “Meanwhile Britain’s Boomers will be left clinging to the wreckage, scraping by in their old age.” Whether that rhetoric proves prophetic or overblown will depend on the government’s ability to deliver for all generations, at home and abroad, in the challenging year ahead.
