Speculation over Andy Burnham’s leadership ambitions has sharply divided Independent readers, with many weighing both his political record and the practical hurdles he would face.
Several pointed out that Burnham is not an MP, making a leadership bid highly complex. He would need to win a by-election, secure the backing of dozens of MPs, and then convince the party to rally behind him – a process some described as “unwise” and potentially disastrous for Labour if it triggered months of infighting.
Others argued that such turmoil could hand the initiative to the right, risking a Farage resurgence or another long spell in opposition.
Some readers defended Burnham’s analysis of Labour’s limitations, warning that Starmer’s government has so far failed to deliver the transformative change needed to prevent national discontent fuelling populism.
But others accused Burnham of opportunism, disloyalty, and political posturing, noting it is far easier to “snipe from the sidelines” than make tough decisions in government.
Here’s what you had to say:
Too many uncertain stages
There are too many uncertain stages for Burnham to be able to mount a leadership challenge and if he tried it, he could lose the Mayoralty, let down the North West he loves and be scuppered, possibly by Starmer not agreeing for him to become an official Labour candidate. Or else the public could refuse to elect any Labour candidate in early mid-term unpopularity?
ParcelOfRogue
Do you think Andy Burnham should bide his time or take on Starmer now? Share your views in the comments below.
All the problems facing Starmer would still be there
Burnham isn't on offer as a leadership candidate. Even if he's willing to seek re-election to parliament, he'd have to find a constituency with an imminent by-election, persuade it to select him, win the election, convince 80 MPs (the threshold to trigger a leadership challenge) to back him as leader, and then win the ensuing contest.
Just supposing he succeeded, what would it change? All the problems facing Starmer would still be there, the government would have less time to deal with them, having wasted months on internal infighting, and there would be pressure to call an election, especially if Burnham wanted to pursue a radically different manifesto to the one Labour was elected on. That would be highly unwise.
It would put rocket boosters under the right-wing media narrative that the Labour party is unfit to govern and probably send it back into opposition for another fourteen years, leaving the way clear for Farage or the Tories to dismantle the green economy and lay waste to public services. We all saw what factional infighting did to the Tories. Labour can't afford a repeat of this.
Tanaquil2
Burnham is simply right
Burnham is simply right in his analysis. I predicted when Starmer won his majority that unless his government was radically different, brought fundamental change and was transformative in its policies, its opportunity would be limited and it would be the last Labour government.
Everything to date convinces me that prediction is right. It was also clear Labour's failure would create fertile ground for new ideas and new political forms in the shape of a populist ideology feeding on that failure and the national discontent. Unfortunately that outcome was even more predictable.
Criticaleye
Local and national politics are very different
What exactly Burnham's game is is difficult to say right now. He isn't even an MP so couldn't become PM without a lot of manoeuvring and winning a seat somewhere. He's undoubtedly been good for Manchester which doesn't necessarily mean he'd also make a good PM. Local politics and national politics are very different beasts.
Like Starmer, he'd have some of the factions within the party working against him and he'd have to take a stance and make decisions as to how he'd represent the country internationally as well as his policy on Israel and Ukraine. Despite the UK's diminished clout internationally Starmer has seemingly represented the country well. Appeasing Trump hasn't gone down well everywhere but some believe keeping the door to the US open was more important and he seems to have managed that reasonably well given how unpredictable and irrational Trump is. Maybe a full state visit could have been delayed until it was clearer which way the wind was blowing on the US's relationship with the UK.
How would Burnham cope internationally? Would he be capable of dealing with the level of diplomacy international policy demands? Only time would tell. The problem being the country hasn't got any time to waste as too many issues need to be sorted and soon if Farage is to be stopped. The NHS, care system, social services, benefits, education, prison service and practically everything else is often only being propped up by charities which also need to be controlled as not all are seemingly as charitable as they claim. Whoever became PM would also have to fight an election, almost before they'd have time to start changing anything. A daunting task!
Ambigirls
Easy to snipe from the sidelines
Very easy for Burnham to snipe from the sidelines. Much harder to make the difficult decisions facing our nation. Starmer is hopeless at being PM, but I’d rather that than the bloke from Manchester who couldn’t even decide to turn on the local ULEZ scheme. Sadiq Khan did what was right – not what was popular.
Perchpole
Labour is always riven by infighting
Why is it that Labour is always riven by infighting that makes the Tories and even Reform look positively united? Why is Burnham cynically muddying the waters?
And Corbyn and Sultana's troubled relationship demonstrates the left's inability even to get on with itself.
Why aren't Starmer and his MPs emphasising the massive improvements the government has already made to people's lives? This is partly because Number 10 is often strangely hesitant about making its case with conviction and panache. Polling for the think tank IPPR suggests that less than a third of voters know this government has legislated for the greatest strengthening of workers’ rights in a generation, and less than a quarter are aware that it has given new rights to renters. Add more breakfast clubs, more free school meals, more free nursery places, reducing NHS waiting lists and quicker asylum processing and the voters should be pleased with the progress after 14 years of Tory chaos.
But even when the government does radical things, it hides them. I despair...
hayneman
Going about it in the wrong way
Burnham's going about showing his leadership potential totally in the wrong way. Starmer's position is still too strong, and it's far too soon. He should allow his MP supporters to speak for him; not push himself to the forefront, like he has. By doing what he's done, I think he's blown his chance at leading the party.
UncleSlept
Opportunistic and disloyal
Burnham is just showing that he is opportunistic and disloyal, which isn't new. That said, not sure he has blown his chance as many Labour MPs are scared of losing their seats, whilst many on the Left see it as an opportunity to enact policies that the public have voted against when explicitly campaigned on. Should be a fascinating few years.
Langley
Burnham is a notorious flip-flopper
Spending, tax, the NHS, the small boats, etc, etc. I don't rate Starmer particularly highly but I trust him to deliver more than Burnham – who's always been a notorious flip-flopper.
Perchpole
All things to all men
Burnham seems to want to be all things to all men to garner support. Currying favour with the pro-EU brigade at a Guardian fringe meeting and funny how he now all of a sudden supports full-blown renationalisation. Wasn't quite brave enough to put himself fully out there and is now already retracting things he's just said just a couple of days ago. Not the mark of a leader.
Noverngit1
Utter chaos
Andy is clutching at anything to get him to No 10, the Remainer/Rejoiner community a prime target. The party is in utter chaos, and its various leaders are throwing in ideas which they think will protect their positions or promote them in the party, without a care for what it does to the country and its democratic traditions and practice.
Labour, in my opinion, now constitutes a clear and present danger to decent political process in the UK.
Krispad
Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.
Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.
Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here.
