AIBU to feel like Andy Burnham is an impostor?

[NotABeliever]

Whenever I see him on TV, my first reaction is a jolt of disbelief — as if Andy Burnham has somehow staged a stunt and pushed out the person who actually earned the right to be in Number 10 but somehow everyone is ok with this. It feels like a con, like he’s occupying a role that isn’t his.

What’s strange is that I don’t dislike Andy Burnham, and I’m hardly a devoted Starmer supporter. Yet something about the way Starmer was removed and replaced so abruptly feels fundamentally wrong and unserious . I keep thinking: Starmer is the one who won the election, not Burnham — so how is Burnham now the Prime Minister? It feels like a huge injustice.

I understand that in the UK we elect a party, not a president, and that whoever leads the party becomes PM. But even within that system, it’s hard to accept that a sitting Prime Minister can be shown the door simply for not being popular enough. With three years until the next general election, how can anyone confidently claim Starmer would have lost? Polls swing constantly.

It just feels like a moment of madness — a sudden upheaval that’s left us starting from scratch with a new cabinet and a new agenda, right when the previous team was in the middle of governing and getting on with the job. I can’t shake the sense that something about this isn’t right, and I’m struggling to make peace with it.

Maybe but I prefer him to Starmer and allies, so I’m glad he’s in.

I think the way he got his position as Prime Minister was weasley. People can argue it wasn't undemocratic or illegitimate and they would be correct, but it doesn't make me think he is a man of principle. I hope I'm wrong! I suppose time will tell.

There's another thread asking why people dislike Burnham where many expressed the same view. The whole process of him getting in stinks: Louise Haigh, Josh Simons, Rayner, were all sacked (correctly in my view) by Starmer, who took a hard line on sleaze in his own party (yes, even with Mandelson - sacked Mandy, let McSweeney leave without protest - though people seem to have found him guilty anyway).

These MPs then mobilised against Starmer with Burnham have been rewarded for it, especially Haigh, who is now Burnham's right hand woman (and according to the BBC also led the soft left rebellion on welfare that was ones of the cornerstones of Starmer's demise, probably in communication with Burnham). Similarly, Sarwar and Healey, who surprise surprise have been rewarded by Burnham for the principled stands they "independently" took which helped being the PM down, now have jobs for the boys.

So far so politics you might say, but to those of us who want adults who govern, for people of ALL parties, not just for headbangers in their own party, and felt Starmer was broadly a man of integrity doing a reasonable job clearing up a difficult mess with no money, the stitch up is hard to take.

Even harder is being told repeatedly that Burnham did this to bring in a new kind of government (what, letting ministers off for sleaze as long as they're your mates? Hardly new), that he's a good guy (none of this activity suggests integrity to me, it's just the same old same old), and that now we most give him stability (Starmer was stable, so this is a self interested lie, he wants stability for himself, not his party or us, or he would not have just done what he did).

I'm traditionally a labour voter but I really struggle with what they have done, couldn't vote for his successor in the mayoral election as a result (I voted for Burnham twice as mayor for the record, but won't as PM).

I also feel like this, although I did quite like Starmer

Or when Johnson shoved May aside. And many more examples in history. Mainly Tory PMs forced out by ' The Men in Grey Suits'.

What about Starmer's refusal to let Burnham stand in Gorton and Denton? That forced the Makerfield by election and left Starmer looking rather spiteful.

A change of PM was necessary if we, as a nation, want to withstand the threat of fascist government. Starmer was virtually opening the door to Downing Street and ushering Reform inside.

Where's Josh Simon's reward? Without him none of this would have happened. I'm sure another seat would have been vacated but a different constituency might have brought different results.

All the complaints about his rise to power being undemocratic are a bit silly. They merely suggest that people don't properly understand our parliamentary system. We don't have an elected president. If the largest party in parliament has a majority, then the leader of that party becomes the PM. Labour has a massive majority and Burnham was appointed Labour leader in accordance with the party's rules. There was no leadership contest simply because nobody chose to oppose him - presumably because it was clear that he already had the support of the majority of MPs. There are precedents where this has happened previously and it's all within the normal "rules".

My main worry is that a change of PM is not going to change the fact that the country is in a mess. Burnham doesn't have a magic wand and government isn't easy. It's one thing to stand on the sidelines and carp about everything that the current leader is getting wrong. It isn't so easy to step into that leader's shoes and do a better job. Labour had an awful inheritance after Brexit, covid and 14 years of Tory underinvestment in public services, compounded by external events beyond their control such as the ongoing war in Ukraine, Trump's tariffs and the US/Israel war on Iraq. They added their own errors to this mess, such as the increase in employer NI and the stupid pledge in the election campaign about not increasing "taxes on working people". The cost of living is still soaring and people are struggling. Yes, Starmer had his weaknesses - don't we all?! He was a poor communicator and he made some bad judgement calls. But I think the extent of his unpopularity was far more to do with the situation that the country now finds itself in than anything that he actually did or didn't do.

Burnham is not going to solve people's problems overnight, and it's only a matter of time before he starts to get blamed for this. Any leader in power right now - from any party - is pretty much destined to be wildly unpopular. Because the country was already in a mess, we made it worse by leaving the EU and then everything got worse still as a result of geopolitics.

The real problem is that we're looking for a single leader to fix the massive structural problems that our country faces. No single leader, no matter how charismatic, is going to be able to fix these problems quickly or easily. We need to stop looking for quick fixes and allow our leaders to be honest about the deep shit that we are in, but nobody wants to hear it.

Irrelevant to Burnham's accession. He took a different route.

The Manchester mayoral election had just been held - it costs millions. Starmer was right to say it would be profligate to let Burnham attend in Gorton and then immediately run another one, at risk of losing to Reform after their showing in the council elections (by the way, Burnham said he would not resign as mayor just in case he didn't get in as mp - no integrity).

I don't think it was like that. Burnham was the only potential candidate who was popular among the electorate. There wouldn't have been any point in changing like for like. And of course MPs were happy! They now have a better chance of keeping their seats in the next GE.

Oh it'll come. Simons, who was sacked by Starmer for investigating journalists, saying he stood down for the good of the country was one of the sleaziest parts of this rebellion. Treating the electorate like idiots.

Why is not resigning from your job if you don’t get the one you went for a lack of integrity? Surely, we’d all be guilty of that.

And if he had been immediately rewarded, you would have been straight on here shouting about corruption!

Hmm. Quite politically motivated, it transpires. Why hide your own politics?

I couldn't care less either way. Healey and Mahmood are the two cabinet ministers who have earned their place. Most of the others are backstabbing jokes. There's room for one more when Burnham sees fit.

YOU THINK HE WAS DOING A GOOD JOB??

Normally it wouldn't, but it shows Burnham was acting in HIS interest, when all the rhetoric is about how he took these difficult decisions with a heavy heart FOR US. it's the lying and hypocrisy I can't stand.

Of course. We believe you.

I do t have too much of an issue with this although the forcing of a by election was pretty bad - how much did that cost the taxpayer?
what I do have an issue with is the dishonest people who have previously resigned being given jobs again. What sort of message is this putting out.
Apparently Angela Rayner got £17k compensation for having to resign ( she should have been sacked) and now she’s back. There seems to be a lot of cronyism at work.

It’s obviously fictional and you have to look past Kevin Spacey but I recommend watching House of Cards on Netflix. Politics is a dirty game, it always has been and always will be. Starmer’s downfall is nothing new, the Tories did it to Bojo and Truss too, god even May really. They’re not your friends and even your closest allies will oust you à la Caesar.

Did he say that? I'm not expressing a view either way but it would be good to see the context.

Doesn't change the fact that I think (and a lot of others too judging by this thread and others on mumsnet) the way he got to power was snakey and that leaves a bad taste behind. You can argue the toss all you want about whether it was necessary, the way it played out felt underhand. I'm a labour voter, but I thought they were above party politics and a revolving door of prime ministers like their predecessors.

Also yes let’s continue to be really down on Burnham for the next couple of years so Farage definitely becomes PM. Great.

It's shocking when this happens in any party. I've said before how can someone with a conditional discharge not be barred from parliament. It's still a conviction. Schools won't even entertain anyone with any convictions. There will be exceptions in other areas of teaching - after risk assessments.