Polly Toynbee's analysis of the Labour Party's current predicament paints a stark picture of internal strife and strategic missteps. The recent saga surrounding Andy Burnham has thrust Keir Starmer's leadership into sharp relief, revealing what many perceive as a tragic flaw in an otherwise capable politician.
A Northern Martyr and a Cowardly Leader
The decision to block Andy Burnham from standing in the Gorton and Denton byelection has backfired spectacularly for Keir Starmer. By declaring war on the Greater Manchester mayor, Labour has inadvertently anointed Burnham as a northern martyr and hero, while casting Starmer in the role of a coward. This move, executed through evasive proceduralism on the National Executive Committee (NEC), has only served to highlight Starmer's reluctance to confront challenges head-on.
Many within the party opposed Burnham's potential candidacy due to the complications it would have caused had he won. Yet, by preventing him from even reaching first base, Starmer has denied himself the opportunity to demonstrate strength. Instead, he has funked it, opting for a cautious approach that has left him vulnerable to accusations of being frit—a term famously used by Margaret Thatcher to describe political timidity.
Timing and Tactical Blunders
The timing of this decision could not have been worse. Starmer, along with key allies like the chancellor and business secretary, is set to depart for China, leaving him absent from critical engagements such as PMQs and the weekly parliamentary Labour party meeting. This absence from the political frontline is seen as a significant blunder, compounding the error of provoking Burnham unnecessarily.
Burnham was prepared to hazard his political career on an uncertain byelection at a time of wild volatility, where he could have faced losses to Reform, the Greens, or pro-Gaza independents. Yet, he had a genuine chance of winning. Now, if the seat falls to Nigel Farage, delivering Reform its ninth MP, excoriating blame will squarely land on Starmer's shoulders.
The Risks and Rewards of Leadership
A leadership contest featuring Wes Streeting and potentially others would have been hard-fought, with no guarantee of victory for Burnham. However, his willingness to risk everything—blending personal ambition with a resolve to rescue Labour from its slough of despond—demonstrated guts. In contrast, Starmer's decision to block him has dealt a blow to his own standing.
Polling indicates that 66% of Labour members believed Burnham should have been allowed to stand, and members prefer him to Starmer for Labour leader by 48% to 26%. Burnham's positive public rating, buoyed by his northern roots and distance from the detested Westminster miasma, sets him apart from other senior Labour figures. Yet, as psephologists like Mark Pack note, this offers scant prediction of how much lift a new leader would provide, given the anti-politician ferment of recent years.
The Urgent Need for Change
Labour cannot afford to keep calm and carry on over the precipice. This is not merely about party survival but about mortal combat with the Farage forces of darkness. The left-liberal bloc must unite to see off the hard-right influence of Reform UK, which has drawn the Tories into a race-driven orbit reminiscent of Trumpian politics. Starmer himself has framed this as the fight, but it is increasingly clear he is not the one to lead it.
A new leader must be acceptable enough to appeal to tactical voters across the liberal-green-left spectrum and bold enough to pursue immediate electoral reform. This is crucial to ensure parties only gain seats proportional to their votes, preventing a scenario where Farage could win by a mile despite majority opposition, as Labour did in 2024.
The Path Forward
Selecting a new leader must be done with minimal bloodshed, but it needs to happen before May to avert brutal losses in Labour councils and further declines in Scotland and Wales. The choice should focus on who is fittest to draw in the most support for the stop-Farage fight.
Douglas Alexander, the Scottish secretary, rightly argued that the country does not need an internal Labour melodrama amidst crises like the cost of living and public services. However, Labour's failure to persuade on these essentials is precisely what has led to this crisis. If Gorton and Denton falls, it will signal that there is no time to lose.
The NEC's willingness to use the excuse of possibly losing Greater Manchester's mayoralty to Reform shows a complacent acceptance of the party's failures. Labour may risk falling out over policies or leadership, but the great majority of MPs, members, and voters likely want the strongest contender to face the grave national threat.
The Starmer Legacy
Here lies the Starmer tragedy: a good and clever man not made for politics or leadership. His lack of arrogance and earnest endeavour endeared him to admirers, but his deficiency in political instinct and firm direction has proven fatal. Turning the party around after Corbyn was a triumph, and his convictions on issues like children's opportunities and green investment are deep-dyed Labour. Yet, No 10's over-cautious wariness stifled the telling of that story.
As Toynbee notes, we slide into the past tense because that is where Starmer is almost certainly headed. His legacy will be a far longer list of good deeds than anyone heard tell, simply because it was never well communicated. How he goes and who succeeds him is the next chapter in Labour's unfolding drama.
