United Kingdom voters have put a unexpected tag on Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a member of the country's liberal-leaning Labour Party, the architect of what they call “Project Chainsaw” – a not-so-subtle reference to Trump administration appointee Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency that he effectively leads. 

The soft-spoken Starmer, a one-time grammar school “super boy”  who was knighted more than a decade ago for services to the British crown, rose to power last year as part of the anti-incumbent backlash that dominated the busiest electoral calendar on record.  

But unlike most EU elections in recent years in which countries have elected right-leaning leaders, the U.K. in 2024 swung to the left. Starmer’s Labor party easily overwhelmed the Conservatives led by then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, making Starmer the first left-of-center U.K. leader since 2010.

Yet, this year has seen Starmer cozying up newly reelected U.S. President Donald Trump in unexpected ways. 

Starmer was among the first global leaders to visit Trump in Washington, D.C., after his January inauguration, visiting the White House a month later in an unsuccessfully attempt to convince Trump to continuing U.S. support for Ukraine. (Starmer left Washington just hours before the now infamous White House scolding of Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky).

In the latest move, Starmer appears to be taking a page out of Musk’s playbook with a plan to reduce British bureaucracy and make the government more responsive. 

Starmer characterizes the plan as one aiming to “rewire the British state.” But that hasn’t stopped many of Starmer’s countrymen – including some members of his own party – from dubbing it “Project Chainsaw.” (Starmer denies his plan is inspired by Musk and DOGE, which has already – or plans to – eliminate hundreds-of-thousands of federal jobs and shutter entire government agencies. 

The specific image comes from Musk waving a chainsaw above his head at last month’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) gathering in Maryland during remarks about his cost-cutting government strategy. Just behind Musk stood Argentinian leader Javier Milei, who popularized the chainsaw metaphor during his own presidential race in 2023 and who gave Musk the red chainsaw he waved at CPAC. 

The big question is whether Starmer can pull it off in the U.K., where the key institutions the prime minister has vowed to take on – most notably the public health system – are deeply entrenched. Some believe it might be a public relations move: “Will Starmer’s chainsaw be Back & decker or Fisher Price?” an editorial in London’s City AM newspaper asked. 

“Starter has talked a good talk on slashing regulation,” the editorial argues. “But now he intends to go further and outline plans for a wider overhaul of the state’s functions, capabilities, and (apparently) size.”

The jury is still out on how that is going.

Starmer’s opening move was to abolish National Health Service England to reduce the service’s flabby bureaucracy and bring it “back into democratic control.” The move means thousands will lose their jobs, U.K. media has pointed out. 

Starmer has vowed services will not be reduced, and the decision has tentative support from Starmer’s ministers. Analysts say ultimate acceptance of the policy will depend on whether residents see improvements in the way the maligned service works. 

Meanwhile, other European leaders are watching to see how Starmer’s reforms work out.

They come amid a growing “Medical Freedom” movement in the U.S. and some other parts of the world seeking to cater medical care to individual needs without the government footing the bill.

Other big European countries with national health care systems like Italy and Spain generally do better than the U.K. by using a decentralized approach, linking regional health authorities rather than a single national authority as with the British system.

But almost every European is struggling with high debt, and if taking a move from Starmer (or Musk) can help them shave off a few tenths of a percentage point of public spending without reducing services, many will likely try it.