I was planning to share some thoughts following on from the Makerfield by-election today. However, I’ve been overtaken by events. This morning it was no surprise to hear that Keir Starmer is resigning as prime minister. So, I’ll move on to some thoughts about the future shortly but first I am going to still share those by-election reflections because I think they are pertinent to what comes next. Remember that my aim in this type of article is not to take party political sides but to help us think through what is happening in public life. Although in this article, I’m not going to draw out the implications of change for those of us in Gospel ministry, however, I believe that we need to be alert to what they might be.
So, first of all, what are we to make of that by-election. Well, I think it is worth understanding why Andy Burnham did so well. And it bears repeating that he did well. People have talked much about a stop Reform vote and tactical voting. I’m sure there was some of that. However, this was less about people moving from their traditional support, to lend their votes to Burnham. Rather, it is better viewed as a return to norm. Crucially, though, just a bit of tactical voting does not explain the victory. Burham finished well clear of his opponents so that even if the right had united, they could not have outvoted him. What is telling is that we saw the turnout increase from the General Election and so turnout was much higher than we are used to in a by-election. This tells us that Burnham was also getting voters to turn out who haven’t participated in democracy for some time. Labour used good old-fashioned methods to canvass, confirm support and get out the vote. The question is whether those voters were personally enthused by Burnham or whether other things were at play.
During the by-election, there appeared to be a surge in support for Rupert Lowe. This spooked Reform and so we saw a lot of attacks on Restore, they were accused of risking splitting the vote and letting Burnham in. In the end, Restore didn’t split the vote in that way. However, there was a sense in which they did. You see, what I suspect played a part in motivating turn out was that the spats between Reform and Restore drew people’s attention to the true nature of the radical right. They got drawn into a tussle with each other and the desperate need to prove who could be the most hardline on immigration.
Part of the reality was that Reform geared up to fight a normal by-election with a low turnout. In such a situation they may have pulled off a victory. They were geared up to motivate the discontent to turn out and support them in a low turn out contest. They were not geared up to getting non voters to start voting. Further, they highlighted the lack of depth in their still relatively new party by choosing a candidate woefully inadequate for a contest in the full glare of media attention. He might have snuck in as a surprise winner in a General Election but he simply was unprepared for public scrutiny.
Now what about Sir Keir himself? We frequently hear that he is deeply unpolitical and that he is basically a good and decent man. Perhaps the latter is true, I don’t know the guy personally but when you need people to tell us that you are good and decent, that suggests you have at least a public perception problem. We should not need to be told that. Personally, I’ve never warmed to him and thought he came across at times as quite vicious and sneering especially at set piece events such as the election debates and at PMQs.
Was he unpolitical? Well, no one goes into politics without being political. Indeed, my view is that Starmer was highly political. Think about how he approached PMQS. There wasn’t even the pretence of answering questions. Starmer simply responded to each question by pointing out that he had won the General Election and then moving to attack the opposition. Therein lies the biggest reason, in my opinion, for his failure. Starmer won a huge majority on a very small share of the vote. He won a landslide without being popular. He was in by default. He became Labour leader by not being Jeremy Corbyn and Prime Minister by not being Boris Johnson, Liz Truss or Rishi Sunak. It wasn’t so much a great victory for Labour as a terrible, self-inflicted loss for the Tories. Unfortunately, Starmer seemed to quickly believe his own spin and the usual hubris that we see develop around long serving leaders developed rapidly for Starmer and his team.
What of the future? Well, it looks like Andy Burnham will be the next Prime Minister with a coronation looking likely. Wes Streeting has indicated he will not stand as leader. This suggests that he is expecting a senior job in the next cabinet, perhaps even as Chancellor. This was thought to be Ed Miliband’s next job. I could be wrong but I wonder, especially following the Aberdeen South by-election victory for the Conservatives which Kemi Badenoch turned into a referendum on Miliband’s environmental policies, whether rather than being the kingmaker with a potential senior role, Miliband might just find himself as the scapegoat, blamed for Starmer’s failure. By the way, we have also heard much about how Burnham will be more leftwing. Perhaps, especially if there is a contested election (one reason why Streeting and others on the right may prefer a coronation) he will move Labour to the left. However, if he is seeking to counter Reform, he may well tack more to the centre. Remember that Burnham started out in politics as a Blairite whilst Starmer himself has been on the soft left of Labour.
Whatever, happens next, it looks like we are going to continue to be in for an interesting and unsettled period of time in terms of national politics. For Christians, the good news remains that our trust is not in politicians, our hope is in the Lord.
Faithroots 