In a reader Q&A, chief political commentator John Rentoul addressed questions on Keir Starmer’s survival, potential successors and media scrutiny, warning the Peter Mandelson row has triggered a slow-burning crisis for Labour.
Sir Keir Starmer has had a bruising week, and it is no surprise that many readers used a recent Q&A with me to test how serious the situation really is. The prime minister’s handling of the Peter Mandelson row has left readers questioning not just the facts of the case, but his grip on power.
During the Ask Me Anything session, I pushed back on claims that Starmer’s position is immediately untenable, arguing that while knowingly misleading parliament would normally demand resignation, I do not believe he has done so. Instead, the focus should be on the political fallout from what he has admitted was a mistake.
That fallout is where concern deepens. I think it is unlikely Starmer will lead Labour into the next general election, yet MPs remain reluctant to move against him – largely because of doubts about who would replace him. Angela Rayner is viewed as the frontrunner but lacks broad electoral appeal, while figures such as Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting are part of an unsettled field.
Readers also raised questions about media scrutiny, internal Labour tensions and whether the crisis reflects a wider loss of authority. The overall picture is of a prime minister not yet finished, but increasingly vulnerable – with pressure likely to build rather than fade.
Q: Is the media overreaching on this story?
Gordon Fielden
A: This is a popular point of view, and I am grateful to Gordon for expressing it well. We at The Independent are well aware that a lot of people think that many of the details of the process of Peter Mandelson's appointment to Washington are boring, insidery, obsessive and unrelated to more pressing problems of the cost of living, war, immigration or the health service. On the other hand, there are many people who think that we have failed to put Mandelson, Morgan McSweeney and the rest under sufficient scrutiny and are letting bad people get away with doing bad things. We hope to provide a range of news coverage and analysis to satisfy a wide audience and to hold politicians to account in the national interest. Inevitably, this is going to involve simplification, especially in headlines, that will annoy some well-informed readers. It might even contribute to an overheated media atmosphere that Gordon thinks is bad for the country. I don't agree. A free press is essential to democracy, and lively disagreement about politics and the actions of politicians is the lifeblood of a free society.
Q: Is the Mandelson saga a political “hit job” against Starmer?
Cat
A: If you are going to be PM, you are going to be criticised. What is more, some of your supporters are going to think that the criticism is unfair. Unfortunately for Starmer's supporters, he has admitted that he made a mistake in appointing Mandelson. He is sorry about it but does not think it means he should resign, and I agree with him. Other people may take a different view. Long live pluralism and democracy.
Q: Did Starmer knowingly mislead Parliament?
AmazingFarce
A: Knowingly misleading Parliament on something important would be a resigning matter, but I don't think Keir Starmer has done that. Mind you, I didn't think that the privileges committee should have found as it did against Boris Johnson, whose premiership was rightly terminated by his party on political grounds because it rightly thought he would lose them the next election.
Q: Why is Starmer still PM?
Robbie
A: "I was elected by the British people", as he said at PMQs on Wednesday, "because they had had enough of 14 years of the Conservatives". Or words to that effect.
Q: Can Starmer survive – and win the next election?
DisgustedOfMiddleEngland
A: I think it is unlikely that Starmer will lead Labour into the next general election, but as long as Angela Rayner is the likely winner of a Labour leadership election, Labour MPs will hold back from ousting him. It is possible that enough Labour MPs (81) will decide that Rayner couldn't be worse, after the Scottish, Welsh and English local elections next month, but I think it is more likely that Labour's trauma will drag on into next year.
Q: Why don’t Labour MPs back Rayner?
Dan Dennis
A: I think she is unfairly downgraded in two respects. She suffers from prejudice against a working-class woman, often expressed in the form of questioning her intelligence, when it should be obvious from her career that she has exceptional political talents. And public opinion seems to take a much harsher view than is justified of her underpayment of stamp duty, which struck me as an honest mistake in a complex situation. She should have sought thorough advice in the first place, but it was not a hanging offence. As for her appeal to Green voters, though, I don't think that she is popular outside Labour's ranks. Party members like her and would probably vote for her as leader if there were a vacancy now, but the kind of former Labour voters who supported Hannah Spencer in the Gorton by-election are unlikely to be swayed by her.
Q: Who are the credible successors?
Laertes
A: There are ambitious would-be successors waiting in the wings. How credible they are is a matter of opinion. I think Angela Rayner is more credible than Andy Burnham, who is a very good city mayor, but never seemed to have much to offer as a prime minister. We reported that Burnham and Rayner met last week in her Manchester constituency, and no doubt they discussed a possible alliance in the event of a leadership election. It is possible that Rayner would want to help Burnham get back into Parliament, if she thought she couldn't become PM but he could, and that he might give her a big job. But I think she has her eye on the top job herself, so their meeting was more likely to have been about building alliances that might help her. Personally, I think Rayner might be a good PM, but she is very unpopular with the wider electorate. My preferred candidate would be Wes Streeting, the health secretary, who is a reformer and a good communicator.
Q: Does it really matter who replaces Starmer? Politicians are all the same
captaintripps
A: Voters are not powerless. That kind of paranoid conspiracy thinking is pernicious. People can always make a choice between politicians and policies on offer, even if the difference is a marginal one between unsatisfactory options.
Q: Would Starmer have a future role after PM?
Imsethorus
A: As things stand, I think he would make a good foreign secretary, having built up good relations with many world leaders, even if Donald Trump seems to have gone off him. His extreme unpopularity among the British people shouldn't be an obstacle to that.
These questions and answers were part of an ‘Ask Me Anything’ hosted by John Rentoul at 11am on Friday 24 April. Some of the questions and answers have been edited for this article. You can read the full discussion in the comments section of the original article. For more insight into UK politics, check out John’s weekly Commons Confidential newsletter. The email, exclusive to Independent Premium subscribers, takes you behind the curtain of Westminster. If this sounds like something you would be interested in, head here to find out more.
