As Labour descends into renewed infighting over Brexit, leadership manoeuvring and the growing threat from Nigel Farage and Reform UK, Independent readers have been deeply divided over who should lead the party into the next general election.
Our poll has so far produced a tight race between Andy Burnham and Keir Starmer, with Burnham narrowly ahead on 44 per cent compared with Starmer’s 40 per cent. Wes Streeting trails on 10 per cent, while Angela Rayner has received 6 per cent of the vote.
Many commenters argued Starmer remains the safest and most credible option despite frustrations with his leadership.
Supporters said he inherited both a damaged party and difficult economic circumstances, warning that replacing him now would deepen instability and make Labour appear chaotic to voters. Several also argued that Burnham, Streeting and Rayner have either made reckless promises or lack the experience to solve the same problems currently facing Starmer.
Others, however, described Starmer as weak, uninspiring and overly cautious, with some arguing Labour has lost touch with its core values under his leadership. Burnham attracted significant support from readers who praised his record in Manchester and viewed him as more authentic and in touch with ordinary voters, although others questioned whether his appeal would survive the realities of national government.
Brexit emerged as a major dividing line throughout the debate, with readers split over whether Labour should rebuild closer ties with Europe or avoid reopening old political wounds that previously fractured the party.
Here’s what you had to say:
Labour risks repeating Brexit divisions
So Andy Burnham wants to win the North by renationalising infrastructure but not reversing Brexit, and Wes Streeting wants to win the metropolitan areas by reversing Brexit. It is a recipe for disaster for Labour. They were divided like this after the referendum – not knowing which way to go as their voters were so divided. Maybe that is why they needed Keir Starmer, who actually won the general election on a moderate mandate, succeeding in both Red Wall and metropolitan areas!
Burnham’s moral appeal
What most of the country have had enough of is the immorality of our elite and their political poodles. That’s why Zack Polanski appealed so much. No leader in the HoC can claim moral high ground. This is key to Andy Burnham’s USP and, when people vote in the by-election, that will be in some of their thoughts. Who do they want to lead Labour? Even as an ex-Labour voter.
Starmer’s problems are waiting for Burnham
This is madness. Even if Burnham becomes leader, the same problems facing Starmer are waiting for him, and I don’t know that he has any better answers. Plus, he’s coming to them cold and without any experience at the highest level.
The best that Labour can hope for is a modest polling bounce, but what happens when the Burnham hype collides with reality and he can’t deliver instant change?
The best thing Labour can do is keep the disruption and drama to a minimum and focus on delivering its programme, and then see where we are in a couple of years’ time.
New PM would need a mandate
Burnham hasn’t even won the by-election yet, so this is all hypothetical.
But if Labour replaces Starmer and installs a new PM, we’re back to the same issue as the last Tory government – leaders chosen internally, not by voters.
After Johnson, Truss and Sunak, it’s hard to argue that’s a healthy way to run the country. There’s a strong argument that a new leader should go to the public for a mandate.
The replacements are worse
Are any of the likely candidates any better? I don’t think so. Are they probably worse? Yes, I think so.
Andy Burnham has made a very rash promise to renationalise utilities. Does he have a clue how costly that will be, both directly and indirectly?
Streeting has pledged to try to rejoin the EU. Again, extremely rash, as he has no idea what the EU would demand – would we have to join the Euro, for example?
Keir Starmer, for all his faults, would not have made such reckless promises. This is student politics.
Burnham understands what has to be done
Burnham is linking the failure of politics to support and drive investment in industry, infrastructure, etc, as a root cause of UK issues over the last 40 years. He is stating that too much wealth has been funnelled out of regions that could do much more to advance the UK.
In Manchester this trend has been reversed. Burnham may not have been the driving force there, but he clearly understands what has to be done. Growth is teamwork, not down to personalities.
In the coming months, let’s see what plans Burnham has, and if these are clear I hope Labour and the public back him.
Starmer deserves more credit
Starmer is doing an excellent job and making good progress in very difficult circumstances. His earlier mistakes are water under the bridge and we are still here. Burnham is no superhero with all the answers, and, more importantly, all the resources. Streeting has already shot himself in the foot. Rayner is a supporting act, nothing more.
Europe debate must be confronted
All three of them need to be bold and Burnham is now being timid on the Europe question and Reform, as a consequence of his desperation to get back to Westminster, having erroneously plumped for Makerfield as a Reform-voting constituency.
Burnham has, by backtracking, undermined his own earlier position on rejoining the EU, and will eventually fall into the same “Ming Vase” approach that Starmer took to win the last general election. All Starmer has proven is “if you go into government without a clear plan, expect to get called out for not delivering [even if improvements are made]”.
While politics is not a predictor of “fortune favours the brave”, this is a time when the case needs to be made to the “traditional Labour voter” that being fully in Europe is in their interest.
So, to answer the question as to who should lead, easy: whichever candidate has the guts to call the European question for what it is, and truly take on Reform on the most critical of issues, once and for all (although caveated with the fact they must do that sincerely, and have a realistic chance of success at both taking the leadership of the party and the country at the next general election).
Starmer should remain leader
Starmer should remain the Labour leader and the would-bes and their supporters should grow up and realise that they will only harm the party by pursuing their own interests.
Starmer succeeded in the task of readying the party for power and it was largely his single-minded direction as leader that got the party elected back to power.
He’s doing a great job under difficult circumstances and still has three years to accomplish some of what needs to be done, including putting the EU back on the table.
Weak, ego and lack of integrity
Starmer is weak, uncertain. He doesn’t have beliefs. He’s clearly afraid of Trump. He doesn’t really have any plans for the UK, only remaining PM as long as possible.
Streeting is a wolf with an inflated ego, not well disguised as sheep, consumed with ambition, who will do anything to get to the top. And it shows too much.
Rayner doesn’t send out positive waves. As a former trade unionist, she would struggle to coalesce voters around the same vision. Besides, her integrity has been brought into question for several reasons. And, sadly, gender is still a liability at the ballot box...
Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.
Want to share your views? Simply click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to have your opinions showcased.
Want your voice to stand out? Independent Premium subscribers enjoy priority for featured comments. Subscribe here.
Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment, click here.
