London: A decisive moment in British politics finally arrived on Friday (UK time) when Andy Burnham won a convincing victory that swept him into parliament so he could act on his undisguised ambition to become prime minister.
And then he failed to act.
Burnham, touted by his admirers as the obvious candidate to replace Prime Minister Keir Starmer, made no formal move to launch a leadership challenge. He sat tight. And dragged out the tortured guessing games about the contest to come.
Starmer is deeply unpopular, his government is drifting, and his cabinet ministers are giving up on him. All the signs point to a necessary decision within the Labour Party to set its direction. Either it endorses Starmer, or it elects his replacement.
It is untenable for the government to go on without a vote on its future.
Burnham chose not to seize the moment. While his supporters have claimed for months that he has the numbers to launch a challenge, he chose not to put this to the test at the earliest opportunity. In a tactic familiar to Australians who have watched countless leadership spills in Canberra, he used the media to do his work for him.
This led to yet another day of rumour, speculation, anonymous sniping and media commentary about what should happen next. It led to everything except a resolution.
While Burnham is being championed by Labour insiders as a political messiah, he is untested and unknown for many voters. He was last in parliament more than nine years ago, when he rose to become health minister for a year before Labour lost power at the 2010 election. He left Westminster for his home in the north and became the mayor of Greater Manchester.
Labour supporters rate him for the way he fixed basic services, like the buses, and could speak directly to ordinary people.
One voter in Manchester, Jasmine Broadmeadow, a student, told this correspondent in early May that she liked the way Burnham could take calls from locals on talkback radio without lapsing into waffle.
“I think we need a new Labour Party leader – 100 per cent we do,” she said. “If Andy Burnham was to run for prime minister, I’d vote for him.”
For his admirers, this makes Burnham the “king of the north” and the answer to Labour’s prayers at a time when it is being smashed in the opinion polls.
Labour got a taste of its fate at the local government elections on May 7, when its support collapsed, and that means MPs are looking for a saviour to keep them in parliament at the next general election, due in 2029.
An antidote to Farage?
In returning to parliament, Burnham has shown that he can defeat the rising force in British politics, Nigel Farage and his Reform UK party. Burnham won 54.5 per cent of the vote in the byelection for his seat on Thursday, while the Reform candidate received 34.3 per cent.
This suggests Burnham could be good for Labour. None of this debate, however, is about whether Burnham would be good for the country. He is yet to outline any solution to Britain’s long list of problems.
The British economy has flat lined, the number of job vacancies just hit a five-year low and there are more than 1 million young people not in education, employment or training. The government’s public sector debt is about £2.8 trillion ($5.4 trillion) and is climbing past 94 per cent of GDP. Many voters are angry that asylum seekers are coming by boat across the English Channel; another 1102 arrived over the past week.
Unable to decide bold fiscal or economic reforms, the government is paralysed. The former defence secretary, John Healey, quit on June 11 because he thought the government’s defence investment plan was inadequate – a damning conclusion. The former health secretary, Wes Streeting, quit on May 14 because he had lost confidence in Starmer.
Burnham has few answers, so far. He has sounded tough on welfare in interviews with the conservative media and soft on spending when talking to progressive outlets. He is being all things to all people – and much of the media is being very gentle with him.
All the pressure was on Starmer on Friday. The predator faced few questions about his plans, while the media watched the prey. Starmer, knowing he had to respond, declared that he would fight any challenge.
“If there is a contest, just to be clear with you, then, yes, I will run, I will stand,” he said. “And I’ve said repeatedly, I’m not going to walk away from that.”
Under the Labour Party rules, a challenger needs 81 of the party’s MPs in the House of Commons to force a leadership vote, which should be decided by thousands of party members. Burnham’s lieutenants have claimed since May 2 that they had the 81, but they have not proven it by taking the next step.
The hesitancy in the Burnham camp may be a wise sense of caution. Continued for too long, it would reveal a lack of conviction, even a lack of courage.
How long should the British public have to wait for Labour to make up its mind about its leader and its government? The speculation about replacing Starmer has been spreading inside the party, and across the media, for at least a year.
In the latest stage of the guessing game, some Labour figures suggested that MPs should decide the leader without a vote by the members. Ministers reportedly spoke to Starmer to urge him to stand down in order to avoid a ballot – and their views were relayed to the media from sources that remained anonymous.
These are the predictable ploys a challenger uses to make an incumbent surrender without a fight. Burnham clearly wants a coronation. But if Starmer does not oblige, Labour will have to have a contest – and Burnham will have to act.
That means declaring that he is standing for the job, explaining why he is doing so and telling the British public what he offers. It also means he would have to answer the biggest question of all about his ambition to replace Starmer. What would he do differently?
Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.
David Crowe is Europe correspondent for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.Connect via X or email.