So, another shitshow for Labour, though at least the media has moved on to Starmer’s trip to China.
It’s incredible that Labour has managed yet another own goal, and there is plenty of coverage about this in the press, all of it that I have seen either blaming Starmer himself or his stooges on the NEC. What I’m amazed about is the fact that Burnham himself appears to have come out of this as the thwarted hero. And I don’t understand why.
I’m London-based, so I don’t know for sure how Burnham is seen within his mayoralty, but certainly the image of him at least is of someone doing a good job, a bulwark against the madness of Reform and of Westminster, perhaps in equal measure. And he does appear to be doing a good job, much like Sadiq Khan, but without the racist rhetoric of both Reform and Trump lined up against him. So in that sense he’s got a pretty cushy number: a broad powerbase in a populous and rightly proud region, that very much stands up as ‘not London’, even defining itself as such to some extent.
But there are important differences to London. Khan is mayor of one of the world’s great cities and as such gets the deserved scrutiny from that. Beyond going to the voters every four years, Khan answers to the Greater London Assembly of which more than half are not Labour, whereas Burnham is scrutinised by the GMCA, made up of the ten council leaders in his patch, all Labour. Starmer, meanwhile, has a huge majority in Westminster, but equally vociferous opposition.
Clearly, therefore, Burnham has a cushier number as Mayor, and one might wonder why he’d want to go through the hell that is becoming an MP only to then start on the road to unseating Starmer as PM, which he clearly does. The answer, of course, is messianic ambition, brought on by his current lack of opposition in the Mayoralty. But surely he’s got advisors? Can no one speak truth to him?
This brings me onto my point. I don’t understand why Starmer’s allies on the NEC have been getting it in the neck for blocking Burnham from selection for the Labour candidate for the Gorton and Denton by-election. Of course they have, they could have done none other. Reform are ludicrous, but they are riding high in the polls and any move by Burnham to become a backbench MP would trigger an election for Burnham’s vacant seat as Mayor, with the very real risk of Labour losing far more than a single Westminster seat. Of course, Burnham causing this fracas has now, I’d guess, made it far more likely that the seat will be lost to Reform, as many Burnham supporting Labour voters will now stay away.
Thanks to Burnham, the NEC found itself in a Catch-22 – if it had allowed him to stand and then Reform had won the Mayoralty, things would have been far worse than the current situation.
No one could have done anything about this mess, except for one person. Burnham could have easily predicted all this and could have kept his powder dry for another run when the situation wasn’t a lose-lose situation for Labour. I don’t understand why anyone but Burnham is being blame for this mess.
Also, anyone old enough to remember, Burnham was not one of the towering figures of New Labour. Whilst he was the Culture Secretary for two years, overseeing the delivery of the 2012 Olympics, following that he hit the big time as Health Secretary, a post he only held for 11 months, a post in which he was accused of being overly political and not candid enough. In short, Burnham didn’t set the world on fire at Cabinet Level in the run up to the 2010 election defeat. If Labour wants to rid of Starmer and revitalise with a new, inspirational leader, Burnham isn’t it.