Labour's Political Paralysis

Following Labour's drubbing across Britain, we were told Keir Starmer was about to make the speech of his political life. The stakes had been raised as Catherine West of Catherine West fame did the rounds on Sunday saying she was going to challenge him if the cabinet didn't come together and pass the baton on to someone else. The Prime Minister needed to impress jittery MPs and signal a change of direction. The inside politics gossip faithfully transmitted by BBC and Sky stenographers told us that Starmer was impatient and wanted to abandon incremental change. Was he about to break with six years of plodding leadership and strike out on a new, exciting path?

No, of course he wasn't. His talk may have been a touch more spirited than other recent set pieces. He wasn't wearing a tie, after all. But there was nothing new here. Having watched more of these than most people, it was a classic of the Starmer genre. A few genuflections to his humble origins, and a re-announcement of policies already coming down the pipe. Scunthorpe steel works is going to get nationalised, subject to a "public interest test", and that will be in the King's speech on Wednesday. Nodding to John Major speeches of 30 years vintage, Starmer said his government would put "Britain at the heart of Europe". A bit of rhetorical red meat for unrepentant remainers, but in practice this is merely the return of Erasmus plus a mobility/work scheme for young people. And third there are to be more apprenticeships and guaranteed jobs so youngsters can start building their futures. He said he understood the frustrations of people who've experienced nothing but shocks and price hikes since 2008, he talked about keeping Britain out of active involvement in the war on Iran, how bad Brexit has been, and he made disparaging remarks about Nigel Farage. And that was it. Nothing to address the problems he outlined. No change in direction. And for all his fulminations against a broken status quo, this stall was retailing more of the same.

Yet, it appeared to see off the immediate danger of a challenge. West pulled back from casting herself as a stalking horse and instead would busy herself gathering names so that a new leader can be in post by September. A gambit, by itself, unlikely to succeed. Meanwhile, speaking at the CWU's conference Angela Rayner said we can't go on like this, and lamented the opportunity lost when Starmer blocked Andy Burnham from standing in Gorton and Denton. The afternoon has been a drip, drip of unimpressed Labour MPs making their views known. Joining Chris Curtis and Josh Simons, who'd already broken cover before the speech, were Blackpool's Lorraine Beavers and Newcastle's Catherine McKinnell, and then on Monday evening four junior ministers packed it in: Tom Rutland has resigned his environmental brief, Wes Streeting's bag carrier Joe Morris is gone, the Cabinet Office's Naushabah Khan said the party "needs a change on direction", and David Lammy aide Melanie Ward said the public's verdict last week "was clear". Additionally, Shabana Mahmood's coffer bringer Sally Jameson has called on Starmer to go. As of the very moment of writing, 75 MPs want a new leader.

The issue is whether this is what MPs in general want. It was notable that remnants of the Campaign Group were trying to talk West down from her challenge because they want time to get Burnham back into the Commons. A Streeting premiership is to be avoided at all costs. But also, no one in the cabinet at the moment is willing to go out on a limb. Presumably because their favoured successor is ill=prepared, or because the general mood among the PLP is against a contest, they're all being terribly loyal and sticking on-message. It's worth noting that most who've expressed their views and want Starmer gone are a mix of the usuals and MPs early in their careers.

Part of the paralysis is thanks to the limited range of possible successors. The Streeting vs Burnham/Raynor tale has narrowed minds as it has narrowed options, so there's little to no thought about skipping a generation. Al Carns is occasionally mentioned, but this has more to do with Labour's love for military machismo than whatever his other qualities might be. There are a range of capable others who are unlikely to get a look-in. Off the top of my head, Louise Haigh, Rosena Allin-Khan, and Sarah Owen possess soft left politics, have variously fallen foul of Morgan McSweeney's boys' club, are fresh faces where the public are concerned, and are considerably more dynamic than Starmer and the other "big beasts". The PLP might be short on talent, but there are some who are consistently overlooked.

Whatever the eventual leadership contest looks like, we're in the awkward position that Starmer is finished as far as the country is concerned. He spent the last six years disassembling Labour's coalition of voters and he and his allies appear genuinely shocked that they won't now pay fealty to his party. However, for reasons of convenience, cowardice, and careerism, the bulk of the PLP are reluctant to move on right now. And that could mean we're lumbered with the Prime Minister for a while longer yet.

Edit Obviously, the two minutes this post was up has tipped the scales. According to the BBC's Chris Mason, Shabana Mahmood and others have urged Starmer to lay out a timetable for his resignation. The lesson? On an active news day, never, never post commentary about it until the lead in to the 10 o'clock news is over.

Image Credit