The argument that it would be too costly to run a mayoral election in Manchester and run the risk of its being won by Reform UK is perfectly valid (‘Huge mistake’: Labour in turmoil as Burnham blocked from byelection race, 25 January). The problem is that that is not how the decision of the Labour party’s national executive committee will be read. And this is now a pattern.
Kicking off with the foolhardy acceptance of luxury goodies from Lord Alli, fast followed by the removal of pensioners’ winter fuel payments and going on to a failure to read the runes over the grooming gangs and many other depressing own goals, this government has demonstrated a quite astonishing lack of self-awareness.
Keir Starmer is now beginning to resemble, of all unlikely people, Boris Johnson in his seeming inability to grasp how badly some of his decisions – and subsequent reversals – reflect on him. Good government is not simply a matter of making rational decisions; it is an art, and requires a competence and a finesse and a degree of sophistication which the Starmer government has now irredeemably demonstrated that it lacks.
Salley Vickers
London
• Well, that is the final straw for me. Labour values of equality of opportunity, wealth redistribution, fairness in society and equal justice were something I have passionately believed in all my life, so I have always voted for the party. When it was elected in 2024 with a landslide I celebrated, believing that at last we had a strong, sensible leader and enough political heft to produce real societal change. I was wrong.
Keir Starmer is a manager (and not a very good one), certainly not a visionary leader, and – if there were any doubt – he has just ably demonstrated his (and his political machine’s) fear and weakness in blocking a proven effective leader, Andy Burnham, from returning to parliamentary politics in case he challenges him. Pathetic. If the Labour party is too fearful to accommodate someone of Burnham’s proven talents, it is no longer the party for me.
Dr Pam Melding
St Helens, Merseyside
• Neal Lawson writes in favour of Andy Burnham’s wish to re-enter parliament as soon as possible (Labour can reverse its decision to block Andy Burnham. Here is why it must, 25 January). He fails to ask why Burnham has chosen now to do it.
He could have stood down at the last mayoral election in 2024 or he could wait until 2028, when the next election is due. This would have meant much less fuss, probably a smooth handover and considerably less expense.
If he wanted just to be a constituency MP, either of these options would have made much more sense than jumping ship now. It is clear that his real ambition is to be prime minister, and take advantage of the mess that Keir Starmer finds himself in, and he is afraid that if he doesn’t go for it now, either Starmer will have steadied the ship or someone like Wes Streeting will have taken over.
By choosing the course of action that he has, Burnham has shown himself to be a chancer not deserving of anyone’s support.
Gordon Glassford
Corby, Northamptonshire
• Labour’s national executive committee had no other option. Andy Burnham has clearly been positioning himself as a potential successor to Keir Starmer in the event of a leadership contest. Having him in parliament would be a gift to Reform UK, the Conservatives and the rightwing press, and would clearly undermine Starmer’s authority.
In the grand scheme, winning or losing the byelection is immaterial. We are 18 months into a five-year term, and Starmer deserves a proper chance to carry out his project.
By the end of Burnham’s mayoral term in 2028, he and we will have a clearer idea of whether the government has succeeded in turning things around. To those who have already given up on Starmer: remember where Margaret Thatcher was in the polls at the same point in her first premiership.
Nick Shackleton
Maulden, Bedfordshire
• Sorry, but Andy Burnham is in the wrong. To try to return to parliament, where he could launch a leadership bid, and expect everyone to clear a path for him is irresponsible, disruptive and disloyal – not to say arrogant. In the words of Lyndon B Johnson, quoted in your editorial (23 January), he should stop being “outside the tent pissing in”. Yes, Keir Starmer must change or go, but we need someone who is fresh and dynamic. If not Wes Streeting, someone else who can bring genuine change.
Tim Oelman
Chichester
• While it is disingenuous of Andy Burnham to pretend his primary motive for seeking a seat in parliament is not driven by blind ambition, Keir Starmer’s allies have seriously misread the optics of their decision. It looks like a beleaguered autocrat suppressing opposition and we know how this often ends. This may not be accurate, but across the country Starmer will be seen as lacking the self-belief to see off a leadership challenge. Labour is once again focusing on putting the ball into their own net rather than in the opposition’s. And to think we waited 14 long years.
Bill Dhadli
London
• “Now is not the time for a Labour leadership election” said the headline on a Polly Toynbee article on 18 November. Now, barely two months later, she thinks Keir Starmer should be replaced and argues that “it’s now clear to all that he’s not the one to lead that fight” against Nigel Farage (Here’s the lesson of the Andy Burnham saga: Labour needs a new leader – fast, 26 January). All? Or just those who up until now have defended him to the hilt? If the latter have now deserted him, then Starmer really is toast.
Derrick Cameron
Stoke-on-Trent
• Good to know that Labour’s decision to prevent Andy Burnham from resigning as mayor is based on sound financial reasoning (‘Huge mistake’: Labour in turmoil as Burnham blocked from byelection race, 25 January). Has Keir Starmer considered the possibility of cancelling the next general election on the basis that it will cost too much?
Ron Jacob
London
• May I please remind Labour party MPs and members of the howls of outrage they produced when the Conservative party changed leaders repeatedly? May I also remind them that nothing is calculated more to infuriate voters, and send them into the arms of other parties, than secret backroom machinations, eagerly leaked to the press, about leadership?
Pamela Guyatt
Gunnislake, Cornwall
• “I would be there to support the work of the government, not undermine it,” said Andy Burnham in his letter to the chair of Labour’s national executive committee. And they say northern comedy has died out.
Peter Brooker
West Wickham, London
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
