
Primary Colours
39.7K posts

Primary Colours
@PSQ17266
Pronouns, but not so keen on verbs. 🤭


Peter Kyle was explicit just now on the BBC that he does not want a coronation of Andy Burnham, that a leadership contest that debates how Labour can best hold Reform at bay would be preferable, but that the transition from Keir Starmer to a new prime minister must be “functional” and orderly. The implication of this - and of conversations I have had with other ministers - is that Starmer will announce a date for his departure tomorrow. Their working assumption is that he will exit Number 10 some time around Labour conference in late September, though no one knows for sure. That said, the question of whether or not there will be a proper leadership contest will be open for a few days. The settled position of Labour MPs and members is that Andy Burnham is likely to be the UK’s next prime minister. But that is absolutely not the same thing as saying that they are overwhelmingly against a contest. What they are considering is the risk of appointing Burnham by acclamation without subjecting him to proper scrutiny in a leadership contest, versus the risk that such a contest will undermine “functional” government for weeks and paint their government as no less chaotic than the previous Tory government. To put it another way, can MPs genuinely trust that Burnham has a credible plan for economic renewal if he is left to formulate it in semi privacy? And what kind of image about today’s Labour Party is projected if the party simply appoints another white middle aged man as leader without any kind of challenge? The uncertainty brought by a contest versus the perception of arrogance and mono-culture that would be the result of a Burnham coronation? It is by no means an easy decision.






























