Andy Burnham blocked from re-entering parliament.

Ilovecheese

I don't think the Labour candidate has been chosen yet have they? So a bit difficult to campaign alongside.

That wasn’t what I was suggesting.

I have lost the plot on this conversation I must admit.

The key to Starmer's character is his close association with the convicted fraudster and disgraced solicitor Phil Shiner, who was responsible for many false accusations, subsequently discredited, against British soldiers. Starmer worked pro bono with human rights groups on a landmark legal case attempting to replace British combat law with that of ECHR law. Also involved was his 'close friend and ally' Richard Hermer, Head of Chambers, later raised to the peerage by Starmer to become the unelected Attorney General .

With regard to NEC ruling, I heard or read that Starmer had 'realigned.' the rules concerning appointments of prospective MP candidates at the beginning of this year and also insisted on being involved in the voting process , but I am unable to verify where or by whom.
I doubt anyone will be able to remove Starmer however disastrous his Premiership; he will use his interpretation of the law to stay in power, and fear that rules on the timing of elections may well be altered also, in a blatant attempt to repress challenges.
A bleak future.

There is no such thing as a key to anybody’s character, people are complex, multi faceted, motivated in different ways, and shaped by their opportunities and life experiences.

If Starmer is all that stands between us and a Reform government I’m prepared to back Starmer. However, as a party member that doesn’t mean that I won’t be criticising things that I think are wrong or writing to my MP. Now is not the right time for infighting or leadership elections. And I still maintain that a lot of our economic woes are a result of Brexit which is still theelephantintheroom and that isn’t Keir’s fault, having been a staunch remainer ( unlike Corbyn).

eazybee

The key to Starmer's character is his close association with the convicted fraudster and disgraced solicitor Phil Shiner, who was responsible for many false accusations, subsequently discredited, against British soldiers. Starmer worked pro bono with human rights groups on a landmark legal case attempting to replace British combat law with that of ECHR law. Also involved was his 'close friend and ally' Richard Hermer, Head of Chambers, later raised to the peerage by Starmer to become the unelected Attorney General .

With regard to NEC ruling, I heard or read that Starmer had 'realigned.' the rules concerning appointments of prospective MP candidates at the beginning of this year and also insisted on being involved in the voting process , but I am unable to verify where or by whom.
I doubt anyone will be able to remove Starmer however disastrous his Premiership; he will use his interpretation of the law to stay in power, and fear that rules on the timing of elections may well be altered also, in a blatant attempt to repress challenges.
A bleak future.

The Telegraph’s story “contains flagrant inaccuracies”, the Downing Street spokesman told reporters.
“The Prime Minister did not represent the claimants in this case. The Prime Minister did not work alongside Phil Shiner on this case. The Prime Minister was not the lead barrister in the claim.
“The Prime Minister represented interveners, including the Law Society of England and Wales.
“Interveners do not advocate for either side. Their role is to assist the court on points of law.
“During his career, the Prime Minister has represented British soldiers who were killed in action and were wrongly accused.
“The Prime Minister will never forget the courage, bravery and sacrifice made by British servicemen and women for their country.”

MayBee70

If Starmer is all that stands between us and a Reform government I’m prepared to back Starmer. However, as a party member that doesn’t mean that I won’t be criticising things that I think are wrong or writing to my MP. Now is not the right time for infighting or leadership elections. And I still maintain that a lot of our economic woes are a result of Brexit which is still theelephantintheroom and that isn’t Keir’s fault, having been a staunch remainer ( unlike Corbyn).

Good post. And that is how I feel.

I vowed the if Labour got into power, I would never support everything they did, my faculties are not so dimmed as many Tory supporters faculties seemed to be at the time.

I will also have very high expectations of the government I support .

But I agree that in-fighting and leadership contests must stop.

Reform is the countries enemy - I do not want a mini-Trumpland.

Every day it becomes clearer that Brexit should never have happened, and the judgement and harm done by those who led the way means that they will never be fit for government.

Whoever is in power has to deal with the adverse fall out of Brexit. There are many of us, myself included that do not want a Reform government.

However I worry how well Reform are performing in polls. I worry about Reform being elected. I worry about Reform winning the Gorton and Denton by election. I particulalrly worry about Starmer's personal poll ratings successively getting worse as well as poor Labour Party ratings in the poll. I worry about the recent untrue briefings against Burnham by Starmer allies- thats really not a good look form Downing Street- and underlines there is infighting going on at the top of government.

If sticking with Starmer means Labour will lose the next election are Labour Party members and voters willing to pay that price?

Burnham is not able to be considered a PM contender now as he has not been allowed to stand for election as an MP. There are other contenders however. Whilst I can understand those who say that they wish leadership contests and infighting to stop- the reality is with Starmer personally polling so badly- it is likely to continue. At some stage there has to be a reckoning- what is best for the party.

No I am not willing to stick with Starmer through thick and thin, but just at the moment it doesn’t seem the right time, particularly as I haven’t heard a single Labour politician with either the message or fire that I think is needed to bring the policies needed.

Would Burnham be wanting to give up his mayorship to become an MP again I’d Labour were still in opposition and there wasn’t a chance for him to be PM? WhatI’d like to know is who is funding Reform and, whoever they are, are they the sort of people that want to help the poor? Imo Burnham should fulfil his commitment to the people of Manchester then become an MP at the next election.

Whitewavemark2

No I am not willing to stick with Starmer through thick and thin, but just at the moment it doesn’t seem the right time, particularly as I haven’t heard a single Labour politician with either the message or fire that I think is needed to bring the policies needed.

You are right LemonJam, there will need to be a reckoning for Starmer. Now was a completely inappropriate time for a leadership challenge to be mounted though. It’s too early in the government’s term, the world is in a critical state of change, the domestic policies are being put in place but the effects are not yet being felt, and the Labour Party, as other parties, needs to unite to out manoevre Reform and its ilk. In my opinion it was very heavy footed of Burnham to make his personal ambition a major topic now. I can’t forgive him for that I’m afraid.

He says Starmer has never supported him but I read that he supported him in one of his leadership bids? And would assume he supported him for the Mayors position?

My thoughts were that Burnham has a 10 year success record track record of growth in Manchester and the highest personal poll ratings of everyone in cabinet including Starmer - by far. Much more popular and less bombastic than Streting for example.

Plus it would be some time anyway before Burnham could actually contend for PM position as he has to be MP first and after that secure a government position and demonstrate some success. So it would by definition not be now- but some time in the future. So the "not at this moment" PM change is not on the table as far as Burnham is concerned. If other PM contenders make their strike later this year- next or the following unless Burnham has an MP position he is out of the running- the most popular person for leadership with the public. Starmer knows that.

Plus meanwhile Burnham, in my view would be the most likely successful contender for Gorton and Denton by election. I really hope Labour don't lose that as a result.

With Trump only just completed his first year of a 4 year term- the world most likely will continue in a 'critical state of change" for the duration of this government. I'm not sure the message of Starmer's policy decisions, implementation and direction is reaching the public and that is a fundamental part of Labour's current problem I feel.

I hope you are all right 🤞🤞

Lemonjam how can people compare Burnham to cabinet members when he is not in the cabinet? He was, as I recall, reasonably competent in his brief Ministerial roles, but never exactly stellar. He always seemed to be a career politician and as others have said, failed to win leadership elections. No doubt he is a good Mayor, but it is a bit of a leap to assume he would be a wonderful Prime Minister.

He was, as I recall, reasonably competent in his brief Ministerial roles, but never exactly stellar.
Not as Health Secretary. Mind you, it was rather a questionable time for the NHS under that Government.

I was in the NHS at the time, and he was generally very well thought of, probably the best Health Minister in my career. He led a period of great improvement, waiting lists were at their lowest for a number of years, and patients satisfaction was at its highest. He did have quite a few run ins and make some major mistakes of course, but there has never been a Health Minister worth his or her salt who hasn’t.

I’ve always had a lot of time for him, I just believe he should have kept his powder dry over the last year and picked the right moment, nearer the election if he wanted to return to Westminster.

Don't take my word for it- see what the country's voters believe:
Yougov.co.uk poll 27 January 2026:

"1) 40% of labour voters believe Andy Burham would make a better PM than Keith Starmer
2) 34% of Britons ( ie all voters) have a favourable opinion of Burnham, up 5 points since December compared to 20% seeing Starmer positively
3) 47% of britons ( ie all voters) , including 38% of Labour voters believe it would be good for the country if Starmer were replaced as PM and Labour leader (compared to 26% who said it would be a bad thing and 27% don't know)
4) Briton's tend to believe Labour made the wrong decision to block Burnham's candidacy for the Gorton and Denton by-election by 44% to 12%.
5) 47% of the country feels it would be a good thing if KS was related as PM and Labour leader NOW (compared to 26% a bad thing and 27% don't know)
6) Burham stands out among senior labour figures in terms of personal popularity. 34% of the country have a favourable opinion of B compared to 20% of the public seeing S favourably.
7) The public are more likely to believe the other leadership contenders would do a worse job than Starmer, e.g Raynor (37% to 12%), Mahood (22% to 8%) or Wes Strreting (22% to 8%) etc etc"

We on Gransnet as a demographic are not representative of the Briton's voters. According to this polling data from UK voters, the time is more right than not right to change the PM at this time, and Burnham is seen as the best contender to replace him and the ONLY contender who is considered will do a. better job than Starmer.

I know there are very few who agree with my views and thats ok. But I feel Labour's best opportunity to secure a 2nd term with the best placed leadership successor has been lost by blocking him from standing in the by-election.

That autocorrect made me laugh (while I’m procrastinating on filling in my tax form) I think I’d make a better PM than Keith Starmer too!

I think it’s the heat of the moment following the furore, in terms of who would make the better Labour PM though, if the same question was asked in six months time the answer could be very different, and might not be either of those two.

Casdon I agree with you. I was working in the NHS during the period Burnham was Health Minster 2006-2007 then Secretary of State for Health 2009-2010. He was well thought of and in my experience the best minister ever in my adult life time.

Waiting lists, patient satisfaction, staff satisfaction, commissioning decisions, quality and safety standards, funding allocations etc all improved during his tenures and have not been sustained at such levels ever since.

I am sure in 6 months the poll data will change in some or many ways. It may poll worse for example. But the voting public did make their views clear on 27 January. It provides a bench mark going forward...

On 27/1/25, 47% of the voting public across the country believed on 27th January 2026 that it would be a good thing if KS was replaced as PM NOW, the only minister they feel would make a better job is Burnham, and that 44% of the public feel KS made the wrong decision by blocking Burnham in the by-election. Those are high percentages across the voting public.

This will be tracked and if deteriorate for KS will embolden those MPs vying for his position- eg. Raynor, Streeting and Mahood.

So why did he walk away from being an MP? Sour grapes because he didn’t become leader of the party? And why has he continually criticised Keir since Labour won the election. I don’t look on him as a team player I’m afraid. He reminds me of the union leader that was high profile a couple of years ago that was always criticising Starmer, Mick Lynch.

Yes

A pole taken January 2027 ? Reminds of the poles re Corbyn, he would storm the country. John MacDonall,thought he would, he thought the same of Burnham 2 days ago.

Starmer is frequently misrepresented in the newspapers. Not because he is Starmer, but because he is Labour.
Any Labour leader will be treated the same, and so all 'news' about him should be scrutinised before accepting it as 'accurate'.

An article in the Times today said how awful Lammy was at PMQT yesterday. I didn’t see it myself but my partner came round yesterday afternoon and the first thing he said was how good Lammy had been. The media have got it in for Labour while giving Reform a really easy time.