PEOPLE in Glasgow reacted with a mixture of relief, disappointment and scepticism after Keir Starmer announced his resignation as Prime Minister.
Speaking to The National in Glasgow city centre, most people saw Starmer’s departure as inevitable – but opinions differed over whether it was the right decision. Many expressed doubts over leadership contender Andy Burnham’s ability to fix the country’s problems.
Burnham (below) confirmed this morning that he will seek to replace Keir Starmer as leader of the Labour Party and prime minister.
Paul Cahill, originally from Yorkshire but now living in Scotland, said: "It was inevitable. He had no charisma, was a bad communicator and failed to hit the ground running. He failed to communicate his successes, which I think he did have."
He said he believes Burnham has yet to set out a convincing vision for the country but hopes he can provide stability.
"Burnham is a bit of a shot in the dark because he hasn't presented a clear policy agenda, but hopefully he hits the ground running," he said.
"I wish him the best because I believe a strong Labour Party is necessary, even in Scotland."
Another Glasgow resident, Paul, was less optimistic about Labour's likely successor.
"I think Burnham doesn't have a clear plan – he just goes wherever the wind takes him. Starmer was always going to go but I don't think Burnham's going to be any better."
Bernadette, from Glasgow, said she was impressed by the Prime Minister's resignation speech and believed he should have been given more support by his party.
"I wasn't surprised because I felt the pressure was on and I'm a bit disappointed with the rest of the Labour Party for not supporting him and keeping him in office," she said.
"I would have preferred for him to stay because I know that he's got a good mind for understanding what the problems are."
She also questioned whether Burnham was ready for the UK's top job.
"I have reservations about Andy Burnham's capacity to understand the depth of the problems facing the country and his capacity to tackle them."
Asked what the change could mean for the Scotland, she replied: "That remains to be seen. I think that's the $60 million question."
Many welcomed Starmer’s resignation.
"I'm glad, I'm happy," said Sarah, from Glasgow. "It's about time that he left. He told a lot of lies, he didn't fulfil what he promised and pensioners are suffering."
She added: "It might spur Scotland on to make a move."
Her friend Isabel said she believed Starmer had left the country worse off.
"I think he's actually destroyed the country rather than done anything good for it," she said.
She added: "Let's hope that the next person is going to be better, but we don't know till he gets in. They make a lot of promises but then when they get into that seat the promises go out the window.”
Labour supporter Paul said that Starmer’s resignation had been “on the cards for a considerable time" but questioned whether two years in office was enough time to judge his premiership.
"I'm a Labour supporter. Two years within government is not a long time and given the amount of prime ministers we've had and the economic situation, I felt it was too early to go."
He said Burnham appeared "credible" but said he should face scrutiny before becoming Prime Minister.
"I don't think it's a straight-in job without any questioning."
Not everyone was convinced the leadership change would improve matters.
Asked what Starmer's resignation meant for the country, Jane's answer was simple: "Chaos."
On Burnham, she added: "He's got to prove himself, hasn't he? He's got to do something first."
Becky struck a more sympathetic tone.
"I'm a bit sad for him as a man but I think he's doing the right thing for the country," she said.
"You have to go through some chaos to get it sorted because we're in a bit of a mess at the moment."
She added: "I just hope that a good, honest person becomes the leader of the Labour Party and then the Prime Minister."
On Burnham, she said: "I think he's a good chap but I don't know how good he is on a national level."
