Karen Constantine on Labour’s own goal in blocking Andy Burnham’s candidature for the vacant Manchester seat.
Screamingly negative headlines will not aid Labour’s attempts to win the party’s once cast-iron safe seat, Gorton and Denton. Indeed, there’s a sense of a battle lost before it’s even begun. Whisper it, Manchester Mayor, Andy Burnham, “King of the North”, would have won. And easily.
Of course, as is often stated, winning isn’t everything, and that’s right. In this by-election, a win and the campaign itself represented much more than an opportunity to trounce the opposition and repel the burgeoning right. In Burnham, we had the potential to win and to “win well”. And if ever the U.K. left — the broad left — needed a win and a shot in the arm before the forthcoming Spring elections, it’s now. Andy would not only have galvanised an electrifying GOTV campaign, but would also have modelled that success and inspiration as a fresh and invigorating blueprint for the left’s ongoing electoral success. As he did as Hillsborough champion, he fought for the 97 British citizens who were unlawfully killed. It’s more important than ever to combat the incipient Reform threat. On any platform, on any issue, Burnham, MP for Leigh 2001 – 2017, Secretary of State for Health 2009 – 2010, and standing as Metro Mayor for Manchester since 2017, could be trusted to put Labour’s case forward.
Manchesterism is a lesson for all parts of the U.K. As the Financial Times details, “the city is growing faster than the national average after an economic transformation that started 30 years ago… illustrated by a rapidly transforming skyline, a symbol of an economic turnaround that has taken Manchester from post-industrial doldrums to a place consistently growing faster than London.”
Instead, self-invested self-interest, and a terrifying failure to lead, or to read the “politic real” meant he was, unfortunately, blocked. John McDonnell has laid it out, warning, “Starmer’s Labour is meaningless. Reform will reap the rewards.” Meanwhile, Burnham has been forced to complain about Labour’s bad briefing habit. Neighbouring Liverpool Mayor Steve Rotherham has also spoken out, “challenging gutless people, keyboard warriors” to stop. Labour already looks like losers, and now they’ve taken the goalkeeper off the pitch at the start of the match. The daft “apeths”.
Andy is far from perfect. For many, he was too close to the Blair government, aligned too far to the right. There are other criticisms. His ambition for party leadership isn’t disguised. It’s fair and necessary to take a 360° analysis of Burnham. He’s not without flaws and detractors. And of course, his potential success would have created a Mayoral vacancy, with attendant risk and costs. Some said the likely candidate for Manchester mayor would necessarily be found amongst local MPs, exacerbating the problem of back-filling. It’s a valid concern, not a robust reason to block an outstanding candidate. It’s evidence of Starmer’s fear of losing leadership.
Political pundits are already calling the election (as political pundits do). Reform is in the lead. Labour starts on the back foot, mired in controversy.
Manchester is a place I have known reasonably well for most of my life, and it’s a flourishing, lively city. I’ve been particularly impressed with progress on health care. It’s the only place in the U.K. where life expectancy is modestly rising. “Devo Manc” has achieved something vital and compelling in an area that has some of the worst life expectancy rates in the country. With robust plans for the northern transport link and an ambition to reindustrialise the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution, the Mancunian economy is thriving. How do you measure economic progress? Well, I gauge it on friendly smiles. On young people who help you out when you need it. I didn’t have to struggle with my suitcase on my last visit; assistance was simply given. Not to mention the northern hospitality and service I received at a local cafe, Half Dozen Other, which gave me a delicious S’Mores croissant when I complimented them on how divine their honey peanut butter is! (It really is.)
It’s this sense of can-do optimism that Andy Burnham embodies. His track record — and his teams — speak for themselves. Success despite 14 years of Tory misrule. Success that people can feel. Success that breeds optimism and functions as a path to further Labour success. Contrast that to the unproven track record of the ambitious Reform PPC or the Green candidate. What tangible evidence of either campaigning success or delivery to the voters does either of them have? We wish Angeliki Stogia, Labour candidate, well on February 26th.
We know the threat that Reform brings. The unceremonious blocking of Burnham as a candidate has granted Reform’s candidate, Matthew Goodwin, a phenomenal and unearned advantage and air time. Starmer has gifted the seat, whoever wins, (and I’m assuming it won’t be Labour), they’ll be able to thank our PM.
Starmer’s decision (or indeed MacSweeny’s) lights up both Labour’s failure of democracy and the internal division. Voters aren’t stupid. The narrative that Starmer is “frit” has deep roots. Not allowing a popular candidate to stand takes the voters for granted. The ballot box will be pay back.
Polling expert Sir John Curtice spells it out. “The elections in May look bad for Labour in Scotland and Wales and across England with the exception of London.” Yep! We seem set to face the worst election results in 116 years.
Now Labour Party members are claiming Starmer has signed his own obituary and are cutting up their membership cards. You have to wonder if the full range of impacts was assessed or adequately considered. As it is, it simply looks like more evidence of a London-centric political class that scorns northern working-class voters.
This isn’t a bump in the road. It’s a chasm between the factions within Labour.