Sir Keir Starmer's final appearance at Prime Minister's Questions marked the close of a turbulent chapter in British politics. In an emotional farewell, the outgoing Prime Minister defended his government's record, acknowledged both successes and shortcomings, and reflected on what he described as the end of his political journey before handing over to Andy Burnham next week.

For most British voters, the debate over Starmer's legacy will centre on the economy, public services, immigration and Labour's fortunes. For the Cayman Islands, however, the more pertinent question is whether his premiership materially altered the relationship between the United Kingdom and one of its Overseas Territories.

The answer is nuanced.

Unlike previous governments that occasionally found themselves in direct confrontation with Overseas Territory governments, Starmer's administration was largely characterised by continuity. Cayman remained under the same constitutional framework, with London continuing to monitor governance, financial transparency, sanctions implementation and anti-money laundering compliance, but without any significant constitutional intervention or public dispute.

That continuity should not be mistaken for indifference.

Throughout Starmer's premiership, successive ministers and officials maintained the UK's long-standing position that the Overseas Territories must continue strengthening transparency and tackling illicit finance. Those priorities were not unique to Starmer - they have been pursued by governments of every political persuasion for more than a decade - but his administration showed no sign of reversing course.

For Cayman, that meant familiar conversations rather than new battles.

Burnham's Cabinet

As Westminster prepares for a change in leadership, attention is already turning to what an Andy Burnham administration may look like. A Cabinet reshuffle is widely expected once Burnham formally takes office, with ministers likely to be appointed to reflect his own political priorities and leadership style.

One appointment that may be watched particularly closely in Cayman is that of Baroness Margaret Hodge, who has served as Prime Minister Starmer's Anti-Corruption Champion.

Hodge has long been one of Westminster's most outspoken critics of confidentiality in offshore financial centres, including the Cayman Islands. Over many years she has argued that jurisdictions such as Cayman should move more quickly on corporate transparency, beneficial ownership and measures aimed at tackling tax evasion, money laundering and illicit financial flows. Her interventions have frequently attracted criticism within Cayman, where government and industry leaders have argued that the jurisdiction has often been ahead of larger economies in implementing international regulatory standards and has been unfairly portrayed in UK political debate.

Whether Baroness Hodge remains in her current role under Burnham is, at the time of writing, unclear. Should she leave office as part of a wider reshuffle, it would not necessarily signal any substantive change in UK policy towards Cayman. The United Kingdom's approach to financial transparency has generally been institutional rather than personal, driven by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, HM Treasury and international commitments through organisations such as the Financial Action Task Force and the OECD.

Equally, if Hodge were to remain, Cayman should expect continued scrutiny rather than a dramatic escalation. Her public advocacy has consistently focused on anti-corruption and transparency, and any continuation in office would likely represent continuity rather than a new direction.

Andy Burnham MP himself has said little publicly about the Overseas Territories. His political reputation has instead been built around devolution, regional government and public service reform within England. That leaves relatively little evidence on which to predict how his government may engage with Cayman.

For that reason, expectations of a fundamental reset in the UK-Cayman relationship should probably be tempered.

The reality is that the relationship between London and Cayman is shaped less by the personality of the Prime Minister than by constitutional convention, international obligations and the UK's enduring responsibilities towards its Overseas Territories.

If Sir Keir Starmer leaves a legacy for Cayman, it is perhaps one of stability. There were disagreements, particularly around financial transparency, but there were no constitutional crises, no direct intervention in domestic governance and no significant departure from policies established under previous governments.

As Burnham prepares to take office, Cayman will undoubtedly watch the composition of the new Cabinet with interest. Yet unless that reshuffle signals a broader shift in Whitehall's approach to the Overseas Territories, the Islands are likely to find that the fundamentals of the relationship remain much as they have for years: cooperative, occasionally challenging, but ultimately defined by continuity rather than confrontation.