I participated in a breakfast last week with those close to the ‘action’ in Westminster. A highly interesting conversation ensued about the immediate future of UK politics, against the backdrop of the Labour Party’s shenanigans. I thought it was diplomatically worth sharing.

There was a consensus that Burnham would win in Makerfield and that Starmer was toast regardless of his public determination to hang on. The feeling was Burnham should initiate a leadership contest on Friday morning. He would never be more powerful than at that moment and therefore what was the point in waiting. Timing is everything in politics. This was all before the resignation of the Defence Secretary, John Healey, which happened later in the day but I doubt it would have made a difference to anybody’s analysis.

We then moved onto the qualities required in a Prime Minister and how Burnham and Starmer fared on these criteria. Oh dear…

The four qualities identified by the lead speaker were ‘Politics, Policy, Leadership, Communications’. Whilst there was some sympathy for Starmer’s plight (nobody could quite undersand the depth of his personal unpopularity and put it down to the poison of social media), everyone agreed with the view that No. 10 was a shambles. Starmer was hopeless at the politics of his job, had no discernable policy agenda to reflect what he wanted to achieve in office, exhibited no leadership with his endless U-turns and was a poor communicator. No surprise there, then. Score: 0/4.

Overblown potential…

But, Burnham did little better. With his back history of vacillation (not a details person…), with endless U-turns in the past few weeks on WASPI women, bond markets, rejoining the EU and when he might call a General Election, he was perceived to be weak on politics, hopeless on policy and leadership (essentially blowing with the wind), but good on communications. Score: 1.5/4.

So, we are going through all this turmoil for a mediocre replacement for Starmer. You might ask is the hassle worth it…?

On other topics, there was a feeling the Tory frontbench was generally way below par and that with strong recent PMQ performances, Badenoch was safe for a good while. She has no opponents of any merit internally despite missing the open goal of focusing solely on the economy, the Tories best route to regaining power in the medium-term. We were also given a reminder that the Tories had more influence than their current opinion poll ratings suggest; largest party in the House of Lords and still a sizeable local government player. There is a platform to build on should we forget…

With regard to Reform, most thought it had peaked some while ago and that Farage might not be well. Without wishing ill will, this is the only hopeful strategy of the main parties… He has been rather absent recently which surely has nothing to do with him explaining his undisclosed £5 million gift from an offshore crypto billionaire…

On other parties in this new five party system, Polanski has partly blown it for the Greens and Ed Davey’s LibDems elicited almost no comment which says it all really.

So there you have it. The future success of political leadership in the UK is all about PPLC and, on this basis, voters have little to choose from.

I participated in a breakfast last week with those close to the ‘action’ in Westminster. A highly interesting conversation ensued about the immediate future of UK politics, against the backdrop of the Labour Party’s shenanigans. I thought it was diplomatically worth sharing.

There was a consensus that Burnham would win in Makerfield and that Starmer was toast regardless of his public determination to hang on. The feeling was Burnham should initiate a leadership contest on Friday morning. He would never be more powerful than at that moment and therefore what was the point in waiting. Timing is everything in politics. This was all before the resignation of the Defence Secretary, John Healey, which happened later in the day but I doubt it would have made a difference to anybody’s analysis.

We then moved onto the qualities required in a Prime Minister and how Burnham and Starmer fared on these criteria. Oh dear…

The four qualities identified by the lead speaker were ‘Politics, Policy, Leadership, Communications’. Whilst there was some sympathy for Starmer’s plight (nobody could quite undersand the depth of his personal unpopularity and put it down to the poison of social media), everyone agreed with the view that No. 10 was a shambles. Starmer was hopeless at the politics of his job, had no discernable policy agenda to reflect what he wanted to achieve in office, exhibited no leadership with his endless U-turns and was a poor communicator. No surprise there, then. Score: 0/4.

Overblown potential…

But, Burnham did little better. With his back history of vacillation (not a details person…), with endless U-turns in the past few weeks on WASPI women, bond markets, rejoining the EU and when he might call a General Election, he was perceived to be weak on politics, hopeless on policy and leadership (essentially blowing with the wind), but good on communications. Score: 1.5/4.

So, we are going through all this turmoil for a mediocre replacement for Starmer. You might ask is the hassle worth it…?

On other topics, there was a feeling the Tory frontbench was generally way below par and that with strong recent PMQ performances, Badenoch was safe for a good while. She has no opponents of any merit internally despite missing the open goal of focusing solely on the economy, the Tories best route to regaining power in the medium-term. We were also given a reminder that the Tories had more influence than their current opinion poll ratings suggest; largest party in the House of Lords and still a sizeable local government player. There is a platform to build on should we forget…

With regard to Reform, most thought it had peaked some while ago and that Farage might not be well. Without wishing ill will, this is the only hopeful strategy of the main parties… He has been rather absent recently which surely has nothing to do with him explaining his undisclosed £5 million gift from an offshore crypto billionaire…

On other parties in this new five party system, Polanski has partly blown it for the Greens and Ed Davey’s LibDems elicited almost no comment which says it all really.

So there you have it. The future success of political leadership in the UK is all about PPLC and, on this basis, voters have little to choose from.

It is one of the most damning quotes in recent UK politics. It will do for Labour in the end.

Pat McFadden, the calm, ‘safe pair of hands’ minister was caught saying in a WhatsApp conversation (about his backbenchers) with Mandelson, ‘every meeting I have is ‘who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others’.

This could be the largest fallout from the Mandelson fiasco after the defenestration of Keir Starmer.

It goes to the heart of the stupidity and fecklessness of Labour. It shows a complete misunderstanding of the priorities of the public, of the need for lower taxes on business to create wealth, of the need to get more people into work for their own good and the health of the economy, of what we can afford as a nation. In short, it is infuriating. All is forgiven. Bring back Tony Blair… except he is about as Labour nowadays as Kemi Badenoch.

Labour ministers go on about the need for growth. Either they or their backbenchers or both have no idea what growth means, why it is important, and how to achieve it. Incredibly this was inferred by leaked WhatsApp messages from Darren Jones, Rachel Reeves’ No. 2 at the Treasury, also to Mandelson which surfaced yesterday.

Burnham is no long-term solution to the country’s challenges…

If Burnham becomes the next PM (increasingly likely), the bad traits of a Labour government will get worse. Like the rest of his colleagues he will bang on about ‘working people’ (don’t we all work in any type of job) and be less disciplined on welfare and public expenditure generally. He has already shown irresponsibility towards bond markets. He won’t get the unsustainably of the welfare budget. He is a weak populist and like the worst of his party, almost certainly in hock to the trade unions.

Burnham might justifiably call an election as soon as he moves into No. 10 but he probably shouldn’t. The choice would be too awful for moderates and independents to contemplate, reflecting the current mess called UK politics.

There is only one political organisation occupying the centre ground in UK politics. It is not the LibDems who vacated it years ago. It is Tony Blair and his Institute for Global Change. It is time the Tories embraced its commonsense centre-ground analysis of the world’s problems. You don’t have to agree with Blair’s choice of clients or his slavish obeisance to America to agree with much of the Institute’s output.

Worth listening to…

But Blair has particularly come to the fore this week with his take down of today’s Labour Party. Here is, I confess, a partly AI generated summary of his critique edited by my good self ( I don’t need to read through all the 5600 words…):

• The “Radical Centre” Blair argues is Labour’s only viable path warning that shifting left to appease internal critics is a perennial, dangerous delusion
• Governments which succeed don’t start with a personality contest, or a political question, as in: how do we ‘save the country’ from Reform?” Blair writes. “They start with an idea, a project, a governing purpose, an analysis of what is wrong and a plan to put it right.”
• Labour doesn’t have a coherent, worked-out overall plan for running the country in a fast changing world
• The government has been tone-deaf to the business community in its initial policies—such as expanding workers’ rights, above-inflation minimum wage hikes, and net-zero carbon pledges. Such initiatives stifle economic growth by failing to make the private sector feel supported
• Welfare reform is crucial. The rising bill for incapacity and disability benefits is unsustainable, and the triple lock should be the first to go
• The AI revolution needs to be applied to the whole of government and not be treated as a ‘niche industrial sector’
• The government needs to keep a grip of immigration to head off the far-right
• There needs to be a reset on ‘net zero’ policies to tackle the expense of the UK’s energy supply
• Rejoining the EU is no more a solution than leaving it. A wholesale recalibration of our relationship with the EU is needed, however.

So here we go. What sensible moderate Conservative supporter would disagree with this analysis even with regard to the Labour Party. Of course, Labour’s leadership contenders reply with barbs about inequality showing they don’t have the backbone to take the necessary measures to reduce inequality. The country needs to be better governed with a firm, long-term plan to turn the country around (from not as bad a position as many people believe!). It starts with patient forward thinking policy development focused specifically on the economy.

Today’s Tories seem incapable of the hard work required in Opposition to present a viable case for governing three years from now. It takes time which Thatcher and Blair used effectively. Perhaps they should team up with the Institute for Global Change for a bit of grown-up politics free from worrying about month-to-month opinion polls…

Shame on the Labour Party. Despite Starmer’s refrain of putting country before party, it has done the opposite. In stabbing Starmer in the back wholly unnecessarily, we have a zombie government led by a zombie prime minister at a time of national peril (Ukraine, Iran etc). Labour is simply no longer fit for office whoever leads it. This situation could go on for months if Starmer is determined not to stand down.

And what a motley crew of candidates seeking to replace him. The hugely overrated Burnham versus ‘I have just blown up my career’ Streeting versus the preposterous Rayner or incredible Ed ‘failed last time but that shouldn’t count’ Miliband.

None of them are fundamentally up to the job…

The favourite, assuming he survives a Reform by-election challenge in Makerfield, is Burnham. Why? Manchester’s success is largely down to the actions of the former Leader and Chief Executive of Manchester City Council not the mayor. Burnham’s national policy pronouncements are also hardly impressive; rowing back on blowing up the bond markets or watering down any urge to embrace the EU. He wants to renationalise a swathe of industries and will undoubtedly move the Labour government to the Left although further delegation of powers to the regions does makes sense. He is not a details man.

Burnham will make no meaningful difference to Labour’s fortunes except to at least initially be less unpopular than Starmer. One doubts he will overcome the electorate’s frustration over the chaos at the heart of government.

It is a common belief that the beneficiary of all this is Reform but I don’t agree. Farage has his own troubles and not just the investigation into a £5 million gift. He has a natural ceiling of support which is not far from where his party is now and the current mayhem presents a clear opportunity for the Tories if they were willing to take it. Badenoch has performed well recently and should make sure the Conservative Party contests Makerfield vigorously despite the certain wipeout.

The Tories then need to remake their case for economic competence stating clearly how they would manage public expenditure, introduce business friendly policies and realistically talk about tax aims. The conversation with voters must be clear and honest and include accepting responsibility for past mistakes and perhaps hinting at greater cooperation with the EU, starting with defence which is surely palatable to all Tories… Ultimately, ‘it’s the economy, stupid’ should be their one and only refrain since Labour under a Burnham government or Reform under a Farage government would both be reckless financially. It will still take a good while for the electorate to warm to the Tories of course after their incompetent past but at least Labour is now in the same boat!

The gap in today’s British politics is ideal for a centre-right party to differentiate itself with policies that reward aspiration whilst firmly but sensitively reducing the size of the state. Are the Tories disciplined enough to do this in the face of populism? Today, I doubt it but one lives in hope…

Towards the start of the Labour government’s tenure, this blog made the case that all non-populists should wish Starmer well, regardless of whether they voted Labour. If he was a successful Prime Minister, it would be good for the country generally and, in particular, head off the lure of Reform UK and populists generally.

Hopes were high. The antithesis of a dishonest populist, Starmer had previously held a big government job and would bring competence, process and transparency to his role undiluted by ego.

Solid but just not political enough…

Those hopes seem a long time ago. Taking, albeit minor, gifts, trying to place his former communications head as an ambassador, endless personnel changes handled charmlessly are bad enough, but the Mandelson hire is a real mess. The incompetence, lack of political nous in approaching him and the subsequent fallout is breathtaking. Why the hell was he given the job before being fully vetted? The media continues to feed off revelation after revelation, hysterically pushing Starmer to the brink. However, this blog has always argued the Mandelson saga and all the other missteps are not enough on their own to justify Starmer’s resignation as none of his colleagues would be any better at the job of PM. What a position to be in; the worst of all worlds and a terrible indictment of the quality of today’s politicians.

But…

It is Starmer’s overall inability to do the job of PM which may do for him in the end. Unprepared for government, incredibly he feels any specific political agenda is an unnecessary distraction from his job as, well, the political leader of his country. Need we say more…

Benefits reform has stalled, an anti-growth agenda introduced despite the rhetoric to support business, solutions to the social care crisis kicked into the long grass, house building becalmed, the defence review frozen. The list goes on. U-turns are commonplace as Starmer loses his nerve on policy after policy and the parliamentary majority, now skin deep, remains unused.

Starmer is simply not political enough and has squandered his election victory. The government has no direction, no agenda and has been rudderless since the start. That is his real failure, not Mandelson. He is the Labour equivalent of Rishi Sunak. Decent, basically competent but out of his depth when it comes to the art of politics.

The relatively competent conduct of foreign affairs in an almost impossible environment no longer seems enough. Domestic governance is so poor that Labour’s trajectory is to be wiped out in May’s local elections with the chances of turning things around before the General Election, not due for another three years, looking more difficult by the day.

So, what choice do we have? Labour’s lack of reality that blow hard, lightweight Andy Burnham or Angela ‘tell it as it is’ except on tax Rayner or failed infuriating former leader, Ed Miliband, is its and our saviour is for the birds. Today’s Tories and LibDems also offer very little. No wonder the electorate turns to extremes in frustration as will be shown by next week’s local elections (more on that after the results without the media’s hysteria about the wipeout of Labour…).

Against this backdrop, it still seems we should stick with Nurse Starmer for fear of something worse. But it feels like an increasingly big ask…

The Gorton and Denton by-election result handing a convincing victory to the Greens with Reform UK coming second will be a joy to many on the far-left and far-right. It creates despair amongst moderates.

A bad night for the political centre ground…

Let’s start with Labour’s defeat. The Party got what it deserved. The soap opera over whether Manchester’s mayor, Andy Burnham, should stand and the potential threat to Starmer’s leadership just exasperates voters. Trying to knife the leader of an underperforming government gives the impression of chaos and division. It hardly reassures that the nation’s future is in safe hands.

But Labour‘s real problem is the same one all mainstream parties have. Over promising and under delivering. Add to that, Labour has the additional issue of a huge parliamentary majority on just 34% of the vote. Promising better public services but no core tax rises, delaying tough decisions through policy reviews or U-turns, equivocating on the Middle East which is a sensitive issue in many Labour areas including this one is not a recipe for victory. Nothing seems to change.

The Greens and Reform UK are the beneficiaries of voter disillusionment, certainly not the Tories who with just 600 votes lost their deposit. Tax the rich, legalise drugs, take a firm stance on Israel all played well for the Greens in this constituency. ‘Green’ issues themselves actually played a small role in their campaign. Zack Polanski, the Green’s leader, for all his charisma, is starting to sound and behave like a traditional politician.

As for Reform. An unpleasant candidate, an unpleasant party, did well but not well enough. Immigration is not a catch all issue it seems. Farage whinges about sectarianism and cheating. Who can be more sectarian than his party? It confirms the view that with tactical voting focusing on anybody but Farage, Reform will not form the next government. The belief it has peaked has just gained further validity.

Voters want instant solutions not triangulation and delay. Too many lives are either not touched or disadvantaged by mainstream political parties and patience is running out. Government is more complicated than the solutions offered by political extremes but when Labour and the Tories have such a tin ear to the needs of the electorate, who can blame voters for reaching out for something different.

Starmer will cling on probably beyond May despite the media’s hysteria. But the odds of him surviving are getting longer. The Tory leader Badenoch will stick to her strategy of aping Reform without sufficient focus on the economy. Why? She doesn’t have the patience for the hard slog of slow but steady progress over 10 years. The LibDems are nowhere.

Populism, it seems, is in safe hands even if by default…

You just despair. All we wanted from Starmer was solid technocratic competence with a bit of integrity thrown in. We have tried charisma. It doesn’t work.

And crucially, if Starmer’s government was delivering it would have put a lid on the populism of Farage and Reform UK. The mistaken appointment of Mandelson would have been a sideshow.

So here we are with Starmer in crisis. Endless U-turns as Reeves gets the economy wrong, reforms to planning regulations, benefits, social care stalled. The government is going to miss many of its policy targets. The Epstein/Mandelson fiasco, which hardly fills you with confidence in vetting procedures, just adds to the narrative. But then hindsight is a great thing…

There is no alternative. Labour MPs should let Starmer get on with the job…

However, it is the response of fellow Labour MPs which is most depressing. Rayner, Streeting and Burnham on manoeuvres, none of which would improve the fortunes of this government. Spineless backbenchers running away from necessary reforms now plunging the knife into Starmer often as an act of leftwing revenge.

McSweeney, Starmer’s now former Chief of Staff, who advised on Mandelson’s appointment, is the scapegoat but that may not be enough. Labour currently has a death wish and seems unfit to govern as MPs put personal ambition and score settling ahead of stable government.

They should rally round Starmer and stop feeding the excitable agenda of the media. Yes, he has made many mistakes but can learn from them. He is good on overseas stuff. His main fault is that like Rishi Sunak, he is just not political enough. There are worse crimes.

The public wants steady government, not psycho dramas. They reach for Reform UK only in desperation.

If Labour MPs keeping feeding the narrative that Starmer is on his last legs, the Party should not be in office and deserves everything electorally that will come its way. But do the public deserve the ensuing chaos?

Kemi Badenoch just isn’t good enough. She will keep her job as there is currently no one else to take her place with the demise of Jenrick but that is hardly a ringing endorsement.

To be fair, Badenoch’s performance at PM’s Question Time has improved but you could hardly have an easier target than Starmer’s government. As the fallout from the Mandelson/Epstein saga gains momentum, life will only get easier, temporarily, for the Leader of the Opposition.

But ‘temporarily’ is the key word. Badenoch is arrogant and doesn’t listen. She believes keeping the Tories close to the hard right is the way forward, fighting culture wars to fend off Reform UK whilst making what should be a relentless focus on economic competence a sideshow. One feels for the impressive Shadow Chancellor, Mel Stride.

So over to the launch of Prosper UK last week. Led by Sir Andy Street, a former Birmingham Tory Mayor and successful business leader of John Lewis, and Baroness Davidson, the former Scottish Tory leader, the best national leader the Tories never had, it offers a home to moderate Tories with a relentless focus on the economy. It aims to help Badenoch, not replace her.

I was at its launch. There were at least 250 supporters there. Whilst many familiar faces dated from pre-Brexit times, I was struck by new and younger faces. Street and Davidson outlined their appeal to seven million homeless Tory moderates. Economic competence, a focus on aspiration generally and business in particular, closer alignment with Europe, if nothing else to protect our security and defence, all made blindingly common sense.

Badenoch’s response? She dismissed the initiative, believing she is on a roll as the Tories hit a dizzying 20 per cent in the polls. There is no room for moderate centrists in her view while she obsesses about Reform’s agenda.

Former Tories will continue to drift to Reform UK or the underperforming Libdems as Badenoch flunks an easy lesson in how to land a ball in the back of the net.