Andy Burnham has been blocked from returning to Parliament after Sir Keir Starmer and allies on Labour’s National Executive Committee voted against his bid to stand in the Gorton and Denton by-election.
Only Deputy Leader Lucy Powell supported him, while eight members voted no, and NEC chair Shabana Mahmood abstained.
Labour said the decision was intended to avoid an “unnecessary election” for the mayoralty that could divert resources ahead of upcoming local and devolved votes.
The block may limit Burnham’s return to Westminster in the short term, but it is unlikely to dampen his influence – as a civil war breaks out among the party.
Even outside Parliament, his positions are likely to continue to shape debate within Labour, particularly among the soft-left and northern wing.
With the odds of Burnham and his allies becoming outspoken critics in the run up to May’s local elections increasing, here are some of the areas where his vision for Britain could pose a challenge for Starmer.
A voice for the soft left
The Labour NEC’s decision to block Andy Burnham’s bid for the Gorton and Denton by-election may have strengthened his standing as a leading voice for the soft left. Rather than diminishing his influence, the move could embolden party members sceptical of the leadership’s cautious approach.
Senior figures, including deputy leader Lucy Powell, London Mayor Sadiq Khan and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, alongside trade union leaders, warned ahead of the NEC’s ruling against blocking his candidacy, arguing that local members should have the choice.
Andrea Egan, general secretary of Unison, said earlier this week that blocking him would be “control‑freakery” and a “stitch‑up,” highlighting concerns that the move could be seen as a top-down intervention sidelining a popular regional figure.
Recent government reversals on high‑profile policies have helped burnish Burnham’s standing as a critic of Westminster decision‑making, potentially strengthening his voice on national debates.
Burnham was an early and forthright opponent of the two‑child benefit cap, calling it “the worst of Westminster” and arguing it unjustly penalised families and “can’t be defended”.
After over a year of pressure from MPs and campaigners, Labour announced in November that it was scrapping the policy.
On another front, plans for compulsory digital ID cards announced by Starmer last year were watered down and then dropped earlier this month amid widespread public opposition.
Burnham also publicly dismissed the digital ID proposal with a blunt “not now” at an event last year.
That pattern could lend weight to future interventions on contentious issues such as welfare, public investment and devolution.
SEND reforms
The Government is expected to publish a major schools white paper in the coming months, setting out plans to overhaul the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system.
Ministers are reportedly considering phasing out individual Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), the legal documents that guarantee a specified level of support for children with special needs, in favour of a system where “most needs” are met within mainstream schools.
There are concerns, however, that this could lead to cuts in the level of support for vulnerable children. This came to a head after the Budget, when the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) suggested that changes to how SEND is funded could lead to a real-terms cut of 4.9 per cent.
This white paper publication date has already been pushed back twice amid concerns that it could trigger a major rebellion among Labour MPs, with many concerned that the reforms could cut back support for vulnerable children.
Burnham has expressed support for reforming the system but is at odds with party leadership over the shape of reforms.
Speaking to PoliticsHome last month, he said that while more children should be supported in mainstream settings, reforms must “start from a principle about nothing being taken away.” He added that SEND policy “cannot clearly be cost-driven” and suggested the existing funding “could be spent much better.”
Devolution
Burnham has long positioned Greater Manchester as a model for what he calls “Manchesterism” – decentralising power from London, redesigning public services, and giving local authorities far more control over spending and policy.
Writing for The Guardian earlier this month, he said: “Over the past decade, we have become more and more functional as the country has become dysfunctional… [building] a new, more collaborative political culture that is the polar opposite of the Westminster and Whitehall world.”
Under Burnham, Greater Manchester has brought buses back under public control, integrated transport networks, secured funding for council and social homes, and piloted the Greater Manchester Baccalaureate as a vocational alternative to university.
But, while the Government’s plans for devolution focus on expanding local powers, Burnham has previously called for “maximum devolution,” including new tax-raising powers, full control over post-19 skills and technical education
Burnham’s push for additional powers is also likely to be shared by allies in Labour’s ‘Red Wall’ heartlands.
Economy
Burnham’s approach to the economy differs sharply from that of Chancellor Rachel Reeves, creating a potential source of tension within Labour over public spending.
Reeves has focused on keeping markets confident and sticking to strict fiscal rules, while Burnham argues that the Government should invest more in housing, social care, and public services to secure long-term stability.
Debt and borrowing are the clearest points of disagreement. Reeves has previously warned that overspending risks a “Liz Truss-style disaster” and that the government must maintain credibility with the bond markets.
Burnham, in contrast, told the New Statesman last year UK should not be “in hock to the bond markets” and has called for £40bn of borrowing to fund council housing, arguing the long-term benefits outweigh the cost.
On taxation, Burnham supports bigger changes. In September, he proposed including a 50p top rate for high earners and a possible land value tax, which he said was a much more “radical” economic approach than the one being put forward by Reeves.
Burnham’s more interventionist stance could add pressure on the Treasury. Even without directly opposing the leadership, his calls for higher spending and nationalisation could give energy to MPs and activists frustrated with a cautious approach to the economy.
Hence then, the article about how andy burnham s vision for labour still poses a threat to starmer was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( How Andy Burnham’s vision for Labour still poses a threat to Starmer )
Also on site :