Burnham’s Snubbing has Sealed Labour’s Fate

Here’s a joke: a Blairite, a Brownite, and a Corbynite walk into a bar in Westminster. The bartender says, “Hello, Mr Burnham.”

It’s a joke I heard a journalist tell amid Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham’s last attempts at agitating for a leadership challenge against Keir Starmer, when he dogged last year’s party conference with a considerable presence in the media critiquing the government – spurring speculation which eventually bubbled into nothing. The sense is that Andy Burnham blows with the wind, adopting whichever policy platform most suits the present state of his career.

And today, we have Andy Burnham: local hero, lefty legend. After previously decrying the culture of Westminster, Burnham angled for the Labour candidacy in the Gorton and Denton by-election after the resignation of MP Andrew Gwynne – until Labour shut him down. And he’s cultivated a new ideology – ‘Manchesterism’ – which positions him, coincidentally, just to the left of the most unpopular Prime Minister ever, in charge of a party begging for progressive change. Incidentally, Burnham’s article expounding upon ‘Manchesterism’ appeared on The Guardian’s website right as speculation around Mr Gwynne’s resignation kicked off. Funny how things work out.

In truth, this introduction has suggested a greater hostility to Andy Burnham than I actually possess. His tenure in Manchester seems to have been a successful one (returning public transport to public ownership has been a particular strength), and he’s a fairly gifted political operator. 

But despite my partiality to the man – and my antipathy towards the Prime Minister – it’s clear that his attempt to become an MP was a faux pas. If this weren’t about leadership challenges, to which many are sympathetic, we would damn Burnham for the careerism he’s displayed in recent weeks. To go on about your pride in Manchester, to endlessly criticise Westminster, then attempt to sod off to London? It’s hard not to view Burnham’s actions as abandonment.

Beyond naked careerism, however, it’s clear that Labour have shot themselves in the foot. If a leadership challenge comes, who will triumph? Each option either won’t get past the left-leaning membership (Streeting, Mahmood), or will put Labour’s electoral fortunes in a parlous state (election-loser Miliband, scandal-laden Rayner). Burnham, meanwhile, is the most popular Labour politician in the country. Blocking his re-entry into parliament has skyrocketed the possibility of Labour failure at the next election by scuppering the chances of anyone with a degree of popularity to lead the party.

Keir Starmer seems, underneath it all, to be a decent man who cares about the Labour Party. This is a man who considered resigning after Labour lost the Hartlepool by-election in 2021, as he considered it his responsibility. He should, therefore, have reckoned with the possibility that he could be very shortly be out of a job, and set about availing the party of a suitable successor, should he fail. This may sound quixotic (obviously, Starmer wishes to protect his career) but Starmer could feasibly fight for his job and concern himself with Labour’s alternatives – and he would, if his care for the party prevailed.

Instead, the most viable candidate for the next prime minister has been shackled to the ground in regional politics. And Labour haven’t even quelled the prospect of a coup: Streeting is criticising the government. Rayner is agitating.

Andy Burnham’s absence in parliament prevents the presence of an obvious frontrunner, turning the prospect of a leadership contest into an internecine civil war with bloody ideological casualties: the Left will be ridiculed, the Right will be castigated. It’ll be a bloody contest scorching the party’s reputation. 

Keir Starmer has hurled his party headlong into defeat. The infighting is coming, and Labour are in for a battering. Things can only get bitter.

“Andy Burnham on 13 August 2024 (cropped 2)” by Scottish Government is licensed under CC BY 2.0.