The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[Richard Scott]

You wouldn't have to stop your membership and lose your benefits. You could just opt-out of paying into the union's political fund, which you are legally entitled to do. I don't know of which union you are a member....but quite a few big-ish unions - including, IIRC, the RMT - no longer financially support the Labour Party.

I don't think mine does then, as no political fund, that I know of.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well, it seems as if Operation Fulfil Reform's Stupid Promise is in full swing.

It wasn't a stupid promise at all. A couple of people on here mocked Reform voters for thinking a Labour drubbing might bring down Starmer's government, but it turns out they're more switched on than you think.

 

[Mojo]

It’s a damning reflection on the Labour Party that, with 403 MPs, they appear so short of talent they must engineer two by-elections, costing taxpayers millions, with no certainty of victory, to parachute in their preferred candidate. It’s almost tempting to book a train down to Manchester to help leaflet for Reform.

 

[The Ham]

Yes and no: yes their unpopularity contributed to that tally, but if I've got your location correct, it is a strong Lib Dem area (potentially helped by tactical voting) with Labour performing poorly even in the 2024 county council election, when they were riding high in the polls nationally.

I don't know about the locality of the person in question, but local to me at District level Labour (circa 80) came well below the Green Party (circa 400) who came 4th behind Reform (circa 850 and 25% of the votes) with the winning party getting circa 1,300.

For County election Labour did a little better, but still last by some margin.

However, it does highlight how a party getting a fairly constant 20-30% of vote share could still struggle to get anywhere near 72 MP's against parties who are getting lower vote share nationally but it being very very very low in some areas and very high in others.

Mathematically Reform could get 30% of the national vote and still not have any MP's as Labour, Tories, SNP, Greens, and Lib Dems all do well (35% or more) in a limited number of seats but in the rest of the areas they all do very badly (circa 10%, maybe even lower) so at a national level they might be 20%

 

[martin butler]

If what is suggested about the source of Reforms funding being from an unfriendly country, then anyone supporting or wanting a reform government is really wanting a Russian puppet in number ten,

For Labour, then clearly it needs to change, it needs to stop giving its rivals free shots, it needs to deal with the social media platforms that have attacked it, since the election, and that means investigating political funding, and having robust rules on donations, and overhauling the law on social media being truthful, and factual.

Burnham, might be the man, if he can steady the ship, and install a bit of backbone, instead of pandering to racists, and fascists, be taking them on head first, instead of allowing right wing media to dictate, be instead dictating to them, show what's being done, show the immigration problem is being dealt with, not by being cruel, but by processing them, getting numbers down, and legally returning those who failed. Labour are actually deporting migrants, but no one tells you that do they?

 

[weeklycommuter]

It's being reported Starmer will not block him this time (put as if to say he is too weak now to block him).

The message from Andy Burnham and his supporters is that Andy Burnham should replace Sir Keir Starmer as Labour Party Leader and Prime Minister because Andy Burnham can win more support from voters and has a better chance of winning the next general election.

The counter view is that to win more support from voters the Labour Government must improve their lives and move faster to fix the issues that are making the Government unpopular including the cost of living crisis and the broken asylum system.

Makerfield is a red wall constituency where Reform UK are getting a lot of votes so I expect the thinking is let Andy Burnham stand as the Labour candidate in the Makerfield by-election as the by-election result will then show whether or not it is true that Andy Burnham can win over voters.

If Andy Burnham wins the Makerfield by-election he will have shown that he can win over voters.

If Andy Burnham does not win the Makerfield by-election he will not be an MP, he will not be eligible to be Labour Party Leader and Prime Minister and it will be clear to everyone that replacing Sir Keir Starmer with Andy Burnham is not the change that would win the Labour Government more support from voters.

 

[Broucek]

If Andy Burnham does not win the Makerfield by-election he will not be an MP, he will not be eligible to be Labour Party Leader and Prime Minister and it will be clear to everyone that replacing Sir Keir Starmer with Andy Burnham is not the change that would win the Labour Government more support from voters.

Good analysis. I'm not sure that voters have decided they hate Starmer and still love the Labour party

It's scary that a polarising figure like Rayner is being seriously discussed. I'm on the centre right and I think I'd prefer Corbyn

 

[AlterEgo]

It's scary that a polarising figure like Rayner is being seriously discussed. I'm on the centre right and I think I'd prefer Corbyn

Why would Labour care what you think if you are on the centre right? Interesting to hear Rayner described as "polarising" though! Why?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good analysis. I'm not sure that voters have decided they hate Starmer and still love the Labour party

It's scary that a polarising figure like Rayner is being seriously discussed. I'm on the centre right and I think I'd prefer Corbyn

The thing about Burnham is that he's a Scouser who got Mancs to vote for him - if you appreciate the level of animosity (some friendly rivalry, some more serious) between those two cities you'd know that that is a massive thing. He might be unlucky this time, but I think he will potentially be very valuable for Labour by virtue simply of being able to say the right thing at the right time and appearing vaguely competent.

It is very similar to being able to get turkeys to vote for Christmas (except a bit less negative). That's quite something. While his politics aren't the same as Blair's, I don't think we have seen something similar since back then.

 

[martin butler]

Good analysis. I'm not sure that voters have decided they hate Starmer and still love the Labour party

It's scary that a polarising figure like Rayner is being seriously discussed. I'm on the centre right and I think I'd prefer Corbyn

Perhaps it might take a polarising person like Rayner for Labour to rediscover what it was set up to do? to fight for working class peoples over the establishment,

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps it might take a polarising person like Rayner for Labour to rediscover what it was set up to do? to fight for working class peoples over the establishment,

If it goes there it'll spend a long, long time in opposition. It's only parties vaguely around the centre that tend to win elections in the UK, though Reform is perhaps one of the more extreme that looks like it could. (Though I'm not sure it's actually that far right of Thatcherite Tory, and it's to the left of them on some things).

 

[Broucek]

Why would Labour care what you think if you are on the centre right? Interesting to hear Rayner described as "polarising" though! Why?

They should care because I would vote for a Labour party led by someone with economic credibility and did so in the Blair years. It's desirable to have a leader who can attract non partisan voters if you want to win elections.

My perception is that Rayner is widely disliked by people outside the left wing bubble. For example, the Comments in the Financial Times are mixed on Burnham, Streeting and Starmer but 99% negative on Rayner.

 

[HSTEd]

If it goes there it'll spend a long, long time in opposition. It's only parties vaguely around the centre that tend to win elections in the UK, though Reform is perhaps one of the more extreme that looks like it could. (Though I'm not sure it's actually that far right of Thatcherite Tory, and it's to the left of them on some things).

The party is probably not going to be around to spend a long time in opposition if they don't.

The Blairite strategy of triangulating to the centre only works if the left-wing, where the party base is, can be brought along.
Going to the centre doesn't win you that many votes, so if you lose your base you still lose.

There are not actually very many voters in the centre after all. Which is why the Blairite faction (ie. Mandelson and chums) is currently leading the party to annihilation.

But personally I believe that without electoral reform the Labour party is unlikely to survive as a major party, the fractures in the party apparatus are too deep and too numerous.

 

[edwin_m]

The message from Andy Burnham and his supporters is that Andy Burnham should replace Sir Keir Starmer as Labour Party Leader and Prime Minister because Andy Burnham can win more support from voters and has a better chance of winning the next general election.

The counter view is that to win more support from voters the Labour Government must improve their lives and move faster to fix the issues that are making the Government unpopular including the cost of living crisis and the broken asylum system.

Makerfield is a red wall constituency where Reform UK are getting a lot of votes so I expect the thinking is let Andy Burnham stand as the Labour candidate in the Makerfield by-election as the by-election result will then show whether or not it is true that Andy Burnham can win over voters.

If Andy Burnham wins the Makerfield by-election he will have shown that he can win over voters.

If Andy Burnham does not win the Makerfield by-election he will not be an MP, he will not be eligible to be Labour Party Leader and Prime Minister and it will be clear to everyone that replacing Sir Keir Starmer with Andy Burnham is not the change that would win the Labour Government more support from voters.

A question on this is whether the voters of Makerfield are representative of the voters Labour needs to win over or retain. By promoting socially conservative policies, Labour is already going after this group but by doing so is losing votes to the Greens, which could split the progressive vote at a future general election and let Reform in through the middle. Other parts of Greater Manchester are more progressive and less Red Wall so perhaps, or perhaps not, Burnham by virtue of winning across both has the ability to bridge this gap?

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's only parties vaguely around the centre that tend to win elections in the UK

Sort of, sort of not. If that were entirely true, the Liberal Democrats would win every time.

There are only 100 or so marginal constituencies which really decide the outcome of elections. So, to be more exact, it is the parties who appeal to the people in these constituencies who tend to win elections. That usually means a party more to the centre, but not always. It's in NI but East Londonderry is an example: the DUP won the seat by 179 votes from Sinn Fein. Neither party is what you would call centrist, that's a sign of a community split right down the middle.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Not sure he's done anything positive for the country in the last 2 years!

Does "renationalising the railways" count?
Reopening relations with the EU?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sort of, sort of not. If that were entirely true, the Liberal Democrats would win every time.

While they may not have started that way, the LDs are a left wing party now, they tend to sit a fair way to the left of Labour, though without the trade unionism bit. I suspect they're suffering a lot from the popularity of the Greens as they sit in a very similar political space.

 

[Thirteen]

While they may not have started that way, the LDs are a left wing party now, they tend to sit a fair way to the left of Labour, though without the trade unionism bit. I suspect they're suffering a lot from the popularity of the Greens as they sit in a very similar political space.

I think LDs are courting the Conservative voter who is more centrist as evident by their success in places like Surrey, Richmond, Wimbledon and Kingston.

I've said this before but I think if the Conservatives want to try and win the London Mayoral election, they need to appeal to that LD bloc in SW London.

 

[The Ham]

While they may not have started that way, the LDs are a left wing party now, they tend to sit a fair way to the left of Labour, though without the trade unionism bit. I suspect they're suffering a lot from the popularity of the Greens as they sit in a very similar political space.

I think LDs are courting the Conservative voter who is more centrist as evident by their success in places like Surrey, Richmond, Wimbledon and Kingston.

I've said this before but I think if the Conservatives want to try and win the London Mayoral election, they need to appeal to that LD bloc in SW London.

Again it's location based, commuter belt is likely to vote Lib Dems whist urban areas are likely to vote Green.

Although the one thing of note, the Lib Dems don't appear to have seen a fall in vote share nationally between the GE and the recent local elections.

 

[Uncle Buck]

My perception is that Rayner is widely disliked by people outside the left wing bubble. For example, the Comments in the Financial Times are mixed on Burnham, Streeting and Starmer but 99% negative on Rayner.

I think that FT subscribers are something of a bubble of their own!

The party is probably not going to be around to spend a long time in opposition if they don't.

The Blairite strategy of triangulating to the centre only works if the left-wing, where the party base is, can be brought along.
Going to the centre doesn't win you that many votes, so if you lose your base you still lose.

There are not actually very many voters in the centre after all. Which is why the Blairite faction (ie. Mandelson and chums) is currently leading the party to annihilation.

But personally I believe that without electoral reform the Labour party is unlikely to survive as a major party, the fractures in the party apparatus are too deep and too numerous.

I’ve seen it argued that Brexit effectively divided the country into two blocs: the Leavers formed the right and the Remainers the left. Now instead of trying to appeal to voters from the other side, the goal is to motivate enough of your own supporters.

Personally I am not convinced of this, but it would explain why the most vocally “left-wing” person I know has substantial residential property portfolio and complains about new renters’ rights…

 

[Lighteight123]

The thing about Burnham is that he's a Scouser who got Mancs to vote for him - if you appreciate the level of animosity (some friendly rivalry, some more serious) between those two cities you'd know that that is a massive thing. He might be unlucky this time, but I think he will potentially be very valuable for Labour by virtue simply of being able to say the right thing at the right time and appearing vaguely competent.

I fear this animosity is one sided. I rarely hear anything particularly scathing aimed at Liverpool in Manchester.

For many in Greater Manchester, Liverpool is the go to for a big night out.

 

[Sorcerer]

The thing about Burnham is that he's a Scouser who got Mancs to vote for him - if you appreciate the level of animosity (some friendly rivalry, some more serious) between those two cities you'd know that that is a massive thing. He might be unlucky this time, but I think he will potentially be very valuable for Labour by virtue simply of being able to say the right thing at the right time and appearing vaguely competent.

I fear this animosity is one sided. I rarely hear anything particularly scathing aimed at Liverpool in Manchester.

For many in Greater Manchester, Liverpool is the go to for a big night out.

For me the rivalry is mostly a meme, I've never actually heard of a proper animosity. The closest was my mother hoping that with red being my favourite colour as a child that I would support Liverpool FC in a family of Evertonians over Man United. Politically we aren't much different; both traditional Labour cities with an emerging Reform base (Liverpool's anti-Conservative sentiment shouldn't be mistaken for the people being a monolith of left-wing beliefs).

Truthfully though I doubt Andy Burnham would really do Labour much good, nor Angela Rayner or Ed Miliband, the latter of whom already lose a general election. I think the electoral poison for many people is the Labour Party itself after decades of being part of the two-party system and the Westminster bubble. For all his flaws and his unpopularity, I have a feeling the country might miss Keir Starmer when he's gone.

 

[Richard Scott]

Does "renationalising the railways" count?
Reopening relations with the EU?

Definitely not the first one, just unnecessary waste of money at this moment in time. Willing to bet it makes no difference.
As for second one, would be positive if it's in our interest, if deal not worth having then no. I wasn't in favour of Brexit but now it's happened if we do want to get closer again to Europe it must have a benefit not just sell us out.

 

[AlterEgo]

My perception is that Rayner is widely disliked by people outside the left wing bubble. For example, the Comments in the Financial Times are mixed on Burnham, Streeting and Starmer but 99% negative on Rayner.

The comments in the FT with its overwhelmingly male readership are negative about the only woman? What a surprise, many such cases.

 

[brad465]

They should care because I would vote for a Labour party led by someone with economic credibility and did so in the Blair years. It's desirable to have a leader who can attract non partisan voters if you want to win elections.

My perception is that Rayner is widely disliked by people outside the left wing bubble. For example, the Comments in the Financial Times are mixed on Burnham, Streeting and Starmer but 99% negative on Rayner.

Everywhere online is effectively an echo chamber, including this site, thus is far from representative of a critical mass of the population. That's not to say Rayner is well-liked, but basing this on one site's commenter base is not valid.

 

[Horizon22]

If Labour do lose this election - not unlikely considering Reform's results locally just last week - I think it will be rated as one of the most spectacular political miscalculations in recent times!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 May 2026 ==

While they may not have started that way, the LDs are a left wing party now, they tend to sit a fair way to the left of Labour, though without the trade unionism bit. I suspect they're suffering a lot from the popularity of the Greens as they sit in a very similar political space.

Hardly. They are centre-left at best. If they were that left-wing, they wouldn't be winning swathes of the Home Counties in Surrey / Sussex / Hampshire / Berkshire.

They are suffering against the Greens in former area of urban strength, particularly where they were previously the "anti-establishement" ticket.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

If Labour do lose this election - not unlikely considering Reform's results locally just last week - I think it will be rated as one of the most spectacular political miscalculations in recent times!

Im not so sure that we can compare vs a vote for a future of the country. Last weeks debacle is described by multiple canvassers and observers across the UK as people don't like Starmer not that they don't like Labour so I'd say Burnham can take it. It suits the Torys to see Burnham win as well so dont expect them to not field a candidate neither the Greens which will largely offset what the Torys get.

Much as im against what Labour have done to themselves the ball is in play now so they need to get on with it and Starmer really needs to acknowledge a threat is coming and better that he openly accepts that and formalise the process. This will stand him in good stead and could give him Foreign Secretary if hes prepared to eat humble pie.

thats the best chance of provoking an early general election which for all Labours past rhetoric over what the Torys did they will disregard and play the same game. The Greens could upset the party though and drain off some of Labours vote

 

[JamieL]

If Labour do lose this election - not unlikely considering Reform's results locally just last week - I think it will be rated as one of the most spectacular political miscalculations in recent times!

I agree with this. Labour seem to have talked themselves into a ridiculous position - elements of the PLP have undermined and wrecked the position of the current PM all on the hope that Burnham will be successful. What if he isn't? They will still have to change PM given the damage the PLP have inflicted on him but everyone will know that the replacement PM is 'Team B' which will fatally undermine their position as well. Even if Burnham wins, it is likely there will be a strong Reform showing in his constituency - so will Labour MPs be happy with a PM who may get unseated at the next General Election?

 

[ainsworth74]

It got lost in all the Westminster Psychodrama but here is further damning evidence from the Scottish elections that the only way for Labour to beat Reform is to move further to the right because that's where they're voters are going!

The BBC also has analysis of the regional list votes on their live page (at 2240 8 May), which claims:

Half of Reform list votes are from previous Tory voters, 11% Labour, 12% SNP, 15% did not vote/new voters.

Wait, half of them voted Tory last time? That can't be right. The best and brightest Labour strategists assured us that Labour voters were switching to Reform....

 

[weeklycommuter]

If Labour do lose this election - not unlikely considering Reform's results locally just last week - I think it will be rated as one of the most spectacular political miscalculations in recent times!

I agree with this. Labour seem to have talked themselves into a ridiculous position - elements of the PLP have undermined and wrecked the position of the current PM all on the hope that Burnham will be successful. What if he isn't? They will still have to change PM given the damage the PLP have inflicted on him but everyone will know that the replacement PM is 'Team B' which will fatally undermine their position as well. Even if Burnham wins, it is likely there will be a strong Reform showing in his constituency - so will Labour MPs be happy with a PM who may get unseated at the next General Election?

The Makerfield by-election is the test as to whether Andy Burnham attracts voters back to the Labour Party. If he wins the by-election this proves the case. If he does not win the by-election it shows that changing the Prime Minister will not attract voters back to the Labour Party, there is no point in changing the Prime Minister and the only possible way to attract voters back is to move fast to fix the issues that are turning voters away.

The biggest issue is the cost of living crisis but the asylum crisis is clearly causing a lot of voters to switch to Reform UK. It is in nobody's interest, least of all asylum seekers themselves, to have over 100,000 people waiting for initial decisions and appeal outcomes, many of them, at the expense of taxpayers, in accommodation which could and should be used by residents.

The Home Secretary announced the single-tier Independent Appeals Body to clear and end the asylum appeals backlog but the announcement was six months ago, already sixteen months into the Parliament, and the legislation has only just been announced. This should have been done at the start of the Parliament and clearly needs to be delivered as a matter of urgency.

Leaving the European Single Market has clearly severely damaged the UK economy and added to the cost of living crisis. British citizens will also not thank the Government for not being able to easily live, work and travel in other European countries. While ruling out re-joining the EU was sensible, the UK clearly needs to have a deal similar to Norway or Switzerland. Instead all we get from Sir Keir Starmer are impossible red lines and the failure to take effective action to deal with this.

As Prime Minister and head of the UK Government Sir Keir Starmer has to take ultimate responsibility for these policy and delivery failures that led to a set of mid-term election results which were far worse for the Labour Party than they would have been had the policy and delivery been better. If Sir Keir Starmer is replaced as Prime Minister by Andy Burnham or anyone else the new Prime Minister will need to ensure fast delivery of policies that ease the unpopularity of the Labour Government if they are to avoid the same fate.