Burnham, Streeting, Starmer or ... ?

[IwantToRetire]

Not sure if any are that interested in the possibility of a new PM.

But thought it might be useful to have articles, comments, predictions in one place.

eg if Burnham is rejected by Marketfield does that mean it is Streeting against Starmer or ... ?

Streeting abandoned women at a critical time: Why would they trust him to be PM?

As health secretary, he called the state of maternity services a ‘cause for national shame’. Yet one in four women still report a negative birth experience, and around 300,000 are estimated to have suffered harm during his tenure. Resigning now is just another example of a broader pattern of deprioritising women’s concerns

Continues at https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wes-streeting-woman-maternal-health-labour-leadership-nhs-b2979450.html?loginSuccessful=true

And at https://archive.ph/R6eAG

Don't forget Rayner, Miliband, and ... Lammy?!

If Burnham loses Makerfield it’s entirely feasible that there won’t be a leadership challenge. The rumours are that Streeting doesn’t have the numbers. If there is one it may end up being Al Cairns.

No Labour crisis is complete without Barry Gardiner offering his services, should the party need him.

But will he is Burnhas isn't there? His speech today was said to be strangely empty of any suggestion that Starmer has done anything wrong.

Andy Burnham urged to reveal whether he still backs trans self-ID
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/05/19/andy-burnham-urged-to-reveal-still-backs-trans-self-id/
and https://archive.ph/7BbIu

It is clear that in this time of uncertainty, the only sensible course of action is to invite Jeremy Corbyn to rejoin the party and then elect him as Party Leader and PM.

I might have had a drink or two.

If Burnham doesn’t win, the thing that might save Starmer is that Streeting seems even more shit at politics than he is. Unbelievable as that is.

Well stranger things have happened, with or without drink.

Daily Mail have an article about Burnham's views on women's rights, and a video clip of his appallingly patronising/ignorant response to the question that suggested only a small minority wanted women-only toilets. Plus a one-click survey that you can complete (currently running at 98% for sex-based provision). Do join in: https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15830845/Andy-Burnham-men-identify-women-use-female-toilets.html

Starmer can’t not go.

he’s hated, useless and mortally wounded.

but whatever leader Labour elect, will fail to put in changes of note, because they can’t.

It’s been quite the spicey chat.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5532198-is-andy-burnham-reasonable-to-say-only-a-small-minority-of-women-object-to-men-being-in-their-toilets?page=1

I don’t think women should vote for a party which hasn’t managed to elect a female leader in its entire history.

Also, in fact there has to be a vote on no confidence (I think that's what is called) and wonder how many current Labour MPs are prepared to put their head above the parapet and vote for him to go.

Is it 20%?

Haven't all the die hard anti Starmer left or been expelled?

The last thing we need is another prime minister

Perhaps not, but in a Labour leadership contest all of the candidates by definition will be in the Labour Party. It would seem counterproductive for a Labour member to abstain from the leadership vote to avoid voting for Labour.

Oh yes, certainly. But I don’t much care about the choice between yet another three men. You’d think men would be ashamed to put themselves forward to run a party that has never elected a woman, but apparently it’s fine.

He doesn’t have to go if no one challenges him. Burnham is the only option with any real support.

I just mean that his legitimacy is mortal damaged and therefore he will find it challenging to command the labour party

Andy Burnham has actually said, he thinks that people who want single sex spaces for women are in a minority. He will not be a friend to girls and women if he gets in. From 12:50 in the following video.

I know. That doesn’t change the support he has in the party though. I imagine they don’t think many people will be interested.

Out of that three Streeting is the only one who actually says straight what he believes. The other two always attempt to say 'the right thing'.

That’s not completely known. It depends if Labour MPs shift support if their top candidate doesn’t win the by-election.

AS I found out by checking, it doesn't have to be about is this a popular candidate.

It is about whether 20%(?) of Labour MPs say they have lost faith in Starmer.

That is what starts the process.

Starmer presumably could stand because if Burnham doesn't become an MP then choice is then Starmer, Streeting or Lammy or ...

So around 80 Labour MPs actually have the power.

There can be a vote of no confidence in the government, which would require around 80 Labour MPs to support it. They won’t do that because they’ll be too concerned about losing their seats.

A Labour leadership challenge requires 20% of the MPs to nominate a challenger, rather than express no confidence in the leader (different from the Tory party who submit letters to the 1922 committee and can hold a vote if the threshold is met). If Burnham gets elected then that will probably happen. Otherwise Streeting or someone else may get nominated, if they have the support. . Starmer is automatically on the ballot, unless he resigns. There have been questions about whether anyone bar Burnham has the support among the MPs. Even if they do, all the internal polling suggests that Burnham is the only candidate that would beat Starmer in a poll of members.

It’s always possible that Starmer resigns for ‘the good’ of something, but he’s not showing any sign of that yet.