The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[Tetchytyke]

Streeting is going to be more of the same just perhaps with more personality.

I had the pleasure of having dealings with Streeting back in his NUS days, when he intervened in a silly argument the NUS became involved in with the debating society at the university I was working at at the time. His intervention escalated a silly argument into that university overwhelmingly voting to leave the NUS.

I was a relatively lowly member of the professional staff and I can only think of one or two people I have worked with who have ever been more objectively unpleasant than him. He spoke to all of us professional staff like we were something he'd just stepped in; in his eyes, we weren't important enough to bother being polite to.

His aides keep touting him as a leadership contender but he doesn't seem to have the support. I wonder if he still speaks to more lowly people like they're scum?

 

[styles]

I had the pleasure of having dealings with Streeting back in his NUS days, when he intervened in a silly argument the NUS became involved in with the debating society at the university I was working at at the time. His intervention escalated a silly argument into that university overwhelmingly voting to leave the NUS.

I was a relatively lowly member of the professional staff and I can only think of one or two people I have worked with who have ever been more objectively unpleasant than him. He spoke to all of us professional staff like we were something he'd just stepped in; in his eyes, we weren't important enough to bother being polite to.

His aides keep touting him as a leadership contender but he doesn't seem to have the support. I wonder if he still speaks to more lowly people like they're scum?

NUS used to almost take pleasure in intervening in member unions, particularly around 'no platforming'. Funny that they don't touch the Cambridge Union and Oxford Union who intentionally invite controversial speakers. We had them get involved in our union when one political society decided it would be a good idea to invite Nick Griffin. We actually had already made the decision as a union not to allow Griffin to speak, because despite submitting his speech in advance, he had a track record of drifting off from his prepared speeches and we were not confident that hate speech wouldn't occur. They're not easy decisions to make (especially since 2025), but NUS' intervention was wholly unhelpful.

Student politics is just a bizarre thing. Some people in NUS would rather debate Israel-Palestine than look at things like unconscious bias in marking coursework with names on. The whole organisation just acts in a frankly strange way with irrelevant focus a lot of the time. You can see why 9 students' unions have disaffiliated from NUS in 2026 alone.

I didn't rate Streeting as president of NUS. I wouldn't rate him as Labour Party leader or Prime Minister. I think he'd be more charismatic than Starmer, just a smidge, but otherwise seen as another PR-style PM without a clear passion and direction.

 

[JamesT]

NUS used to almost take pleasure in intervening in member unions, particularly around 'no platforming'. Funny that they don't touch the Cambridge Union and Oxford Union who intentionally invite controversial speakers. We had them get involved in our union when one political society decided it would be a good idea to invite Nick Griffin. We actually had already made the decision as a union not to allow Griffin to speak, because despite submitting his speech in advance, he had a track record of drifting off from his prepared speeches and we were not confident that hate speech wouldn't occur. They're not easy decisions to make (especially since 2025), but NUS' intervention was wholly unhelpful.

Student politics is just a bizarre thing. Some people in NUS would rather debate Israel-Palestine than look at things like unconscious bias in marking coursework with names on. The whole organisation just acts in a frankly strange way with irrelevant focus a lot of the time. You can see why 9 students' unions have disaffiliated from NUS in 2026 alone.

I didn't rate Streeting as president of NUS. I wouldn't rate him as Labour Party leader or Prime Minister. I think he'd be more charismatic than Starmer, just a smidge, but otherwise seen as another PR-style PM without a clear passion and direction.

The Oxford Union isn't a student union like those of other universities, it's a debating society. OUSU is the NUS affiliate.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

The Oxford Union isn't a student union like those of other universities, it's a debating society. OUSU is the NUS affiliate.

The Cambridge Union has the same status. There's a body named Cambridge SU which would be affiliated if it hadn't recently voted to disaffiliate.

 

[styles]

The Oxford Union isn't a student union like those of other universities, it's a debating society. OUSU is the NUS affiliate.

Yes I understand that, but the two entities do communicate and coordinate, and NUS has had no qualms before about intervening in activities coordinated by universities and associated bodies rather than solely SUs. It's just seen as a given that these debating unions are green-lighted into inviting Steven Yaxley-Lennon and Nigel Farage because they're Oxbridge and NUS doesn't want to be seen to be rocking the boat. When I worked in an SU, NUS had no issue bypassing us to speak directly to the university about things when they felt like it.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Funny that they don't touch the Cambridge Union and Oxford Union who intentionally invite controversial speakers.

In fairness, they can't touch those: they're separate organisations, even separate to the students' union. Same at Durham.

It's just seen as a given that these debating unions are green-lighted into inviting Steven Yaxley-Lennon and Nigel Farage because they're Oxbridge and NUS doesn't want to be seen to be rocking the boat.

My experience at Russell Group universities is that it isn't the NUS who are green-lighting people on the right, it tends to be the senior academics. I'm thinking in particular of the gob****e at Durham who is best mates with Rod Liddle and went off on a rant about wet liberals when his entire Junior Common Room walked out of a Liddle speech.

But yes, the NUS political officers are often a pain in the arse to deal with. I had it in (another) SU I worked in where we regularly had to prevent the Islamic Society from inviting various weird and wonderful imams in, usually the ones with fairly colourful views on Israel and usually because the Metropolitan Police liaison advised us that it would be better if we did. But in fairness they were usually polite and well-mannered and receptive to what we had to say, they were just naive.

Streeting, though? I've never had anyone else walk away from me mid-sentence when they realised I wasn't as important as they first thought I was. And I've met and worked with some galactic-sized egos in the past.

 

[JamieL]

The whole situation is turning into a farce. Streeting sees the Prime Minister but nothing happens. His team suggest he will resign tomorrow and then run. But if so, why not resign today or yesterday? The argument he wants to avoid the King's Speech is nonsense - he knew about that yesterday so could have resigned the day before. If he hasn't got the ability to stage manage a leadership challenge, something entirely in his call to initiate, how can he possibly perform satisfactorily as Prime Minister?

 

[styles]

The whole situation is turning into a farce. Streeting sees the Prime Minister but nothing happens. His team suggest he will resign tomorrow and then run. But if so, why not resign today or yesterday? The argument he wants to avoid the King's Speech is nonsense - he knew about that yesterday so could have resigned the day before. If he hasn't got the ability to stage manage a leadership challenge, something entirely in his call to initiate, how can he possibly perform satisfactorily as Prime Minister?

Actually I think this is one of the few things I can compliment Streeting on - the news coverage over a leadership challenge is inevitable at this point, but resigning and launching a leadership challenge the day before or the day of the King's Speech I think would show disdain for the party and government to be honest.

 

[JamesT]

Yes I understand that, but the two entities do communicate and coordinate, and NUS has had no qualms before about intervening in activities coordinated by universities and associated bodies rather than solely SUs. It's just seen as a given that these debating unions are green-lighted into inviting Steven Yaxley-Lennon and Nigel Farage because they're Oxbridge and NUS doesn't want to be seen to be rocking the boat. When I worked in an SU, NUS had no issue bypassing us to speak directly to the university about things when they felt like it.

As @Tetchytyke notes, they're separate. The Oxford Union may have mostly students as their membership, but they aren't affiliated with the University. (Indeed, one of their governing rules is that they won't have anything to do with the University).
If the NUS tried complaining to the University about the Union they'd just shrug their shoulders as it's nothing to do with them. Whereas a more closely associated body they might do something.

 

[styles]

As @Tetchytyke notes, they're separate. The Oxford Union may have mostly students as their membership, but they aren't affiliated with the University. (Indeed, one of their governing rules is that they won't have anything to do with the University).
If the NUS tried complaining to the University about the Union they'd just shrug their shoulders as it's nothing to do with them. Whereas a more closely associated body they might do something.

I can assure you that NUS do get involved in organisations not affiliated with universities or students' unions but have presence on university campuses in other universities. I've dealt with it first-hand.

 

[Cdd89]

Regardless of what or when happens with Starmer, apart from usual calls for election, a general election is very unlikely to happen for at least 2.5 years. They need to steady the ship, not got to early election and get slaughtered.

I'd fully agree with this, with one exception - if Ed Miliband were to become leader and thus PM.

I think the opposition furore about appointing someone who had previously been decisively rejected by the electorate would be quite extreme, and it would be argued to be fundamentally different to previous changes in PM. This would overshadow his leadership to such a degree that I think governing would be very difficult.

 

[styles]

I'd fully agree with this, with one exception - if Ed Miliband were to become leader and thus PM.

I think the opposition furore about appointing someone who had previously been decisively rejected by the electorate would be quite extreme, and it would be argued to be fundamentally different to previous changes in PM. This would overshadow his leadership to such a degree that I think governing would be very difficult.

Ed has no intention of running for leader.

Last time he was asked about this his answer was literally, "No, I've got the t-shirt already."

 

[Harpo]

The whole situation is turning into a farce. Streeting sees the Prime Minister but nothing happens.

Not sure why the charismatic pair (sarcasm) couldn’t have had a phone conversation? Unless it was a ‘tea no biscuits’ summons?

 

[dosxuk]

The whole situation is turning into a farce. Streeting sees the Prime Minister but nothing happens. His team suggest he will resign tomorrow and then run. But if so, why not resign today or yesterday? The argument he wants to avoid the King's Speech is nonsense - he knew about that yesterday so could have resigned the day before. If he hasn't got the ability to stage manage a leadership challenge, something entirely in his call to initiate, how can he possibly perform satisfactorily as Prime Minister?

It feels like he was thinking about doing it, chickened out, but now his team are trying to push him into doing it anyway.

 

[bluenoxid]

I understand that cabinet members were offered the opportunity to pick up a direct discussion with the PM and this could have been a profile raising opportunity picked by both sides.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It feels like he was thinking about doing it, chickened out, but now his team are trying to push him into doing it anyway.

Seems he didn't want to do it just yet but has his hand been forced by the seven minsters that resigned. Who knows but its awful look for Labour who are showing they are just as bad as the Torys and that is the last thing we need as its opens the door further ajar to Reform. I hope the grandees like Blair, Brown, Kinnock Snr etc talk him out of it.

 

[martin butler]

I think the best thing Starmer can do now, is to announce that he will be stepping down as leader, and that he will stay on as PM, until the party has conducted a leadership contest, then he will resign his seat, and there will be an by election for his constituency that will open the way for him to take a seat in the house of lords, and for Andy Burnham to try for his seat. if he wants to at some stage become leader.

 

[Cdd89]

Ed has no intention of running for leader.

Last time he was asked about this his answer was literally, "No, I've got the t-shirt already."

Of course. The Times then reported yesterday that Miliband said he was prepared to run for leader if Streeting triggered an imminent contest. Miliband has since denied this, but it's enough for me not to rule him out.

I would actually argue that he is the only credible candidate, in terms of membership popularity and competence, if Burnham doesn't stand.

 

[brad465]

I think the best thing Starmer can do now, is to announce that he will be stepping down as leader, and that he will stay on as PM, until the party has conducted a leadership contest, then he will resign his seat, and there will be an by election for his constituency that will open the way for him to take a seat in the house of lords, and for Andy Burnham to try for his seat. if he wants to at some stage become leader.

Burnham will not stand in Starmer's seat in North London, there is no way Burnham would fit in there.

 

[jfollows]

I really hope that someone in the Manchester area falls on their sword, Burnham stands in the subsequent by-election and loses to Reform.
I have no time for Reform, but I almost have less time for these stupid Labour games. Burnham gave up a seat in Westminster and ran back to Manchester to be a bigger fish in a smaller pond, but now he’s bored and wants to come back. Tough!

 

[Uncle Buck]

If Burnham wants to re-enter Parliament quickly there are by-elections coming up in a couple of Scottish constituencies whose MPs have been elected to Holyrood. If Farage is convicted of wrongdoing over the mysterious £5 million donation then there may be a by-election in the Clacton seat.

If I were Burnham I would stand in one of these seats. The downside of losing is that he loses, but that risk is present in any seat at all; there is no such thing as a safe Labour (or Tory) seat any more. Even if he stood in the safest Labour seat it is perfectly possible he could lose to Reform or the Greens. The upside is that he wins, drastically changes the narrative and the sheer daring of it creates momentum. “He either fears his fate too much…” etc etc.

 

[jfollows]

Farage would increase his majority in Clacton.

 

[Class73Electro]

I think the best thing Starmer can do now, is to announce that he will be stepping down as leader, and that he will stay on as PM, until the party has conducted a leadership contest, then he will resign his seat, and there will be an by election for his constituency that will open the way for him to take a seat in the house of lords, and for Andy Burnham to try for his seat. if he wants to at some stage become leader.

See to me that's the worst thing to do. As others here noted earlier, the whole Reform campaign was based on the "Get Starmer Out". Let's not make that come to pass.

 

[weeklycommuter]

If Burnham wants to re-enter Parliament quickly there are by-elections coming up in a couple of Scottish constituencies whose MPs have been elected to Holyrood. If Farage is convicted of wrongdoing over the mysterious £5 million donation then there may be a by-election in the Clacton seat.

If I were Burnham I would stand in one of these seats. The downside of losing is that he loses, but that risk is present in any seat at all; there is no such thing as a safe Labour (or Tory) seat any more. Even if he stood in the safest Labour seat it is perfectly possible he could lose to Reform or the Greens. The upside is that he wins, drastically changes the narrative and the sheer daring of it creates momentum. “He either fears his fate too much…” etc etc.

As long as he is Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham needs the approval of the Labour Party National Executive Committee to stand as the Labour candidate in any parliamentary election. He asked for NEC approval to stand as the Labour candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election and the answer from the NEC was no.

 

[martin butler]

See to me that's the worst thing to do. As others here noted earlier, the whole Reform campaign was based on the "Get Starmer Out". Let's not make that come to pass.

I think he will be damaged beyond saving, even if he were to fight off a leadership challenge, his authority will be damaged, and made even weaker, by deciding to stand down, he might actually be helping the next leader to lead a united party.

 

[MP33]

When Nigel Farage held a press conference in Havering. He stated that, he wished that nothing would happen to Starmer. For the reason that he is Reform's best asset.

 

[Uncle Buck]

As long as he is Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham needs the approval of the Labour Party National Executive Committee to stand as the Labour candidate in any parliamentary election. He asked for NEC approval to stand as the Labour candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election and the answer from the NEC was no.

He was refused permission to stand before essentially to save Starmer’s skin. If Starmer is removed anyway now then that motive is no longer there.

In an election without Burnham, the candidates are likely to be Streeting, Rayner and Milliband. Streeting won’t win and the latter two will probably be too left-wing for the general public. Labour’s NEC would be unwise to refuse him permission to stand. Then again, if you are trying to rely on the self-preservation instinct of the Labour Party…

 

[dosxuk]

The last thing we need as a country, and they as a party, is another protracted argument about who's in change.

If I was Starmer I'd be telling the party "I'm here for the foreseeable, get behind me and help me get us back in favour with the public, or get out and start your party, sorry, your own party". Sure he might lose a few MPs but he has such a big majority it doesn't really matter. I suspect him actually standing up for something for once would do a great deal towards repairing options towards him.

 

[SargeNpton]

Of course. The Times then reported yesterday that Miliband said he was prepared to run for leader if Streeting triggered an imminent contest. Miliband has since denied this, but it's enough for me not to rule him out.

I would actually argue that he is the only credible candidate, in terms of membership popularity and competence, if Burnham doesn't stand.

This is where a lot of politicians fail. It's not their party members that they need to appeal to, but the electorate (and the stock market). Look what happened when the Tory members voted for Liz Truss.

 

[HSTEd]

Labour are highly unlikely to get near government after the next election for a long time, if the party survives at all.

These are the last three years they are likely to get for the forseable future.

Being able to win a general election is less important than actually having a coherent programme to use the last shot at government the party will get.

Burnhams suggestions on electoral reform etc are important in that regard. All Starmer offers is scandal-laden tepid status quo for three years, then electoral oblivion.