Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 22 May 20:42
So the Makerfield by-election is going to be in about 4 weeks’ time and it seems the nation is about to be gripped by the soap opera that is the latest attempt by the Labour party to find a leader that liked both by party members and the population at large.
The local citizenry thus will become the unwitting participants in what may be another referendum on the competence of the Prime Minister. This all seems a little self-indulgent, particularly when there is a country to be run, but there you have it. I suspect Sir Keir will be too busy to campaign.
It does seem a little bit like replacing Peter Grant with John Hughes, although a fair amount of Labour party members polled suggest they would prefer Starmer to the alternatives of Rayner, Streeting, Miliband (E), Cooper, Mahmood or Carns (most of whom probably aren’t interested in the job anyway. Yet). Any putative new incumbent of Number 10 is unlikely to have much material influence on Netanyahu, Putin, Li or Trump, who seem to be the source of much of the world’s problems.
I think this is another example of the issue that winning a party nomination, winning an individual election, winning a by-election, leading a party and governing as Prime Minister are all different skill sets. And often people who want the top job don’t know what they want to do when they get it – they just want it to look good or to stop someone they don’t like from getting it instead. Burnham at least has a modicum of appropriate experience of running a major (local) government.
It also illustrates the propensity of the electorate to decide (or to be told to decide) that a particular election is about something it theoretically (and practically) is not.
Reform UK did well by all accounts (particularly their own) in the English local elections (although not as well as they thought they would) in what an election (or series of elections) they decided was not about bins or potholes, but a “referendum on Starmer”. So presumably they will be happy for Burnham to win so that he can become PM. This may explain why they seemed to have selected a particularly unpleasant individual as their candidate. Perhaps it is not possible to find a prospective Reform candidate without a dubious history on social media. The Greens seem torn between standing and not standing – their candidate has quit. The other parties are treating it seriously (without any expectations of winning). I suspect they would think in amusing if Burnham failed to win (although secretly relieved if he does).
I imagine the Labour Party (or the half that is pro-Burnham) will have enough firepower to win, particularly when the Reform candidate’s weaknesses come under the relentless spotlight. Burnham already appears to be pivoting to a cooler (that is, less warm) attitude towards the EU.
However, it is not at all clear to me that Burnham would win a leadership challenge. Where does that leave us?
|
|
