Even if all the results were not as catastrophic as expected for Labour, the writing is on the wall for the old ways of doing politics
H
e wants a little more time and he may just get it. It seems there was enough in the results of Thursday’s elections to allow Keir Starmer to fend off calls for his immediate exit. But that should not obscure the bigger picture, which is not only disastrous for Labour but also has alarming implications for British politics – and even the future of the country.
Start with the prime minister, whose fate was once deemed to hang on these contests. Maybe the political operation at Downing Street has got better, but on Friday morning it appeared that No 10 had benefited from the management of expectations. Labour MPs had been braced for losing as many as 2,000 council seats in England, with 1,500 seen as the threshold for a leadership challenge. But the first analyses pointed to an eventual tally of losses short of that first number, at least. In other words, the results were bad, but not that bad – and therefore good enough for the PM.
Privately, even Starmer’s most loyal allies do not make the case for him fighting the next general election. For now, their demand is more modest. Give him another year; let him see if he can turn things around. These results offered one small, tactical boost to that argument. Defeats to Reform in the likes of Tameside and Wigan, the back yard of Starmer’s most obvious challenger, the Greater Manchester metro mayor, Andy Burnham, are a reminder that there is no guarantee that Burnham could even become an MP, let alone PM. What Labour seat is so safe that Burnham would be sure to win a byelection, even if a sitting MP chose to stand down to make way for him?
