If the polls are to be believed, a bruising set of local election results are on the way for Sir Keir Starmer and his government. Following multiple policy U-turns, the hiring and subsequent sacking of Peter Mandelson and anaemic economic growth, the Prime Minister’s critics argue that these elections will deliver a verdict on his leadership and the “change” he promised the nation.
But if voters do send that message, is it really time to get rid of Sir Keir? Replacing a PM is far from simple, and while it can sound like a fresh start, you only need to look back to the latter years of the Conservative government to see the chaos and panic a leadership change can cause.
So, should Labour replace the PM after the local elections? Our columnist Ian Dunt, political editor Hugo Gye and Spiked’s chief political writer Brendan O’Neill offer their perspectives.
The Labour party is like Wile E Coyote in the classic Loony Tunes cartoons – it has already run off the edge of the cliff, but remains suspended in the air until it looks down.
That moment of truth will surely come in this week’s elections, when voters across England choose new local councils while the Scottish and Welsh parliaments are also up for grabs.
Even if Labour exceeds expectations and beats the opinion polls, it is almost inevitable that the party will still shed hundreds of councillors, lose control in Wales and fall far short of a takeover of Holyrood.
That is why many of Sir Keir Starmer’s enemies see the elections as the moment to bring his premiership to an end. They are poised to argue that Labour cannot recover under his leadership and that any replacement would be an improvement.
This timing makes no sense. Yes, there is an argument that Starmer has become so unpopular that he is now electoral kryptonite – but polling has shown this for some months, so there is nothing new there.
Changing leader in response to a setback at the ballot box, rather than – say – when the Peter Mandelson scandal first emerged or in response to the failure to boost economic growth, would make Labour look petty and self-obsessed, governing in its own interest rather than the country’s. To put it in terms that send shivers down Labour MPs’ spines: it would make them look like the Tories.
And the party must face up to an uncomfortable truth: there is no obvious alternative to Starmer who could be relied upon to both boost Labour’s popularity and keep the Government running smoothly, in the short term at least.
Andy Burnham, the most highly-rated contender, is not eligible to stand because he is not an MP. Angela Rayner is still under active investigation over claims she failed to pay tax on her house purchase while serving as the Cabinet minister in charge of housing. Wes Streeting is loathed by half of his own party who think he is about as right-wing as Margaret Thatcher.
The other alternatives are equally shaky. John Healey, Yvette Cooper, Lucy Powell, Ed Miliband – it is no insult to them to point out that installing one of them in Downing Street, with no mandate from the public, would raise far more questions than it would answer.
The standard of policy “debate” within Labour has been laughable: the left hardly gets beyond “let’s try ignoring the bond markets”, while the centrist wing of the party offers little beyond the notion that sticking with the same agenda but trying to shout about it more loudly might get results.
In the long run, Starmer may well be doomed. He has sacrificed his image as “the grown-up in the room”, and failed to deliver on what once seemed like a new vision of Labour as a party that is pro-business but ready to intervene aggressively to help the poorer half of society, while taking a firm line on immigrants, criminals and others who stand outside the national mainstream.
If and when his MPs – and, crucially, his ministers – decide that his time is up, they should act quickly; but only once it is clear that one or more alternative leaders have emerged who can win the backing of the party and offer voters something substantially different from the status quo.
Ramping up the infighting before that brighter future for Labour is in sight would be the worst of all worlds. The party would limp on with an unpopular leader but refuse to give him the backing he needs to try and turn things around – however difficult that will be.
Starmer may not lead Labour into the next general election. But the party’s best response to bad news this week would be to back its leader for now, to give him the space to rebuild and deliver on more of his promises to the voters – then, perhaps, start quietly thinking about a handover next year.
The transition to a new prime minister can be a success only if it happens from a position of strength rather than – as the Conservatives did – at a time of chaos.
Hence then, the article about starmer is electoral kryptonite but a roster of amateurs won t save labour 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 ( Starmer is electoral kryptonite but a roster of amateurs won’t save Labour )
Also on site :