Andy Burnham’s rise forced Keir Starmer from Downing Street - opinion

Last Wednesday, under the title ”Rearranging deck chairs won’t save a sinking ship,” I wrote about what has been described as the most important and far-reaching By-election in UK history, at an unknown place called Mounterfield.

Let us look at the events chronologically. First, the By-election itself.

Had the consequences not been so important, it would have been as entertaining as any other such election. One of the delights that remains about the UK is every election night. For a small deposit, almost anyone can stand as a candidate in an election. And almost anyone does.

When the votes have been counted, the candidates all stand in a line to hear the results announced. One by one their names are read out, and their vote numbers are given. So it has become a tradition for some candidates to adopt ridiculous (spoof) names, titles and costumes to embarrass the person reading out the result and entertain those in the audience at the town hall and on the television.

For Example:

Howling Laud Hope – Monster Raving Loony Party – 45 votes

Lord Buckethead – 100 votes.

Count Binface – 95 votes

Mad Cow-Girl – 60 votes and so on and so forth

I have to confess to finding this all very entertaining, but as a French person I once knew used to say: “British humor is like British gastronomy, it does not exist.”

But what of the real election result? I had posited the fact that only a combined opposition could beat Burnham, the populist candidate, believed to offer all the things that Starmer lacked – primarily a personality.

In fact, the combined numbers of votes of the opposition would not have beaten Burnham, but together they would have created a momentum that probably would have done. Had they done so, it would have left a powerless Starmer as the most unpopular prime minister in history, and brought him and his government down, rather than just changing leader.

So in fact the opposition parties and Sir Keir Starmer wanted the same thing – Burnham to lose. But the actual result of the election placed Andy Burnham first, whilst in second, third and fourth came the opposition right-wing parties: Reform, Restore, Conservative. The result was a crushing victory for Burnham, leaving him free to enter parliament and launch a leadership challenge.

Meanwhile Starmer was left contemplating his fate. His choices were to carry on in office; wait until he was challenged for the top job by Burnham and stand against him, or resign, thereby jumping before he was pushed. Starmer, realizing the whole of his party were against him, jumped.

Where did Starmer go to lick his wounds and decide his future? A part of the British landscape for those in High office, including the prime minister, foreign secretary and various Church leaders such as the archbishop of Canterbury, have at their complete disposal what are referred to as “grace and favor homes”.

You would rightly guess that the prime minister’s assigned home is amongst the most splendid. A 16th-century house, Oak beams, coiffured and manicured gardens with a mere 10 bedrooms.

The house is named Chequers after the family who owned land thereabouts. The first prime minister to spend time there was David Lloyd George, a garrulous Welshman who had everything the current prime minister lacked– namely a personality.

And the prime ministers would go there from time to time to take advantage of its serenity. Winston Churchill would go there to write his wartime speeches. Boris Johnson went there to greet foreign guests, such as Angela Merkel, his German counterpart.

Starmer, after the bruising result of the Makerfield By-election, bolted to the sanctuary of the country house at his disposal to contemplate his future. He would have played mental chequers at Chequers.

He would have immediately realized he was likely to face political extinction. All he had to do was decide by what method.

By the time he left Chequers, this prime minister had done something that he seemed unable to do during the last two years: make his mind up.

That then brought us to outside the prime minister’s home at 10 Downing Street on a warm Monday. There followed the symbolic significance of bringing out the lectern that prefaces all important announcements.

In this case, Starmer announced that he has heard that his party does not think he is the man to lead them into the next election and intends to stand aside.

I then listened as Starmer listed his “achievements” over the last two years. I truly believed I was hearing things. Of course, he did not mention his 16 “U” turns on policies, nor how he had become a slave to spending vast sums of money on welfare to hand out to those that had journeyed to the UK in rubber dinghies.

The point of this part of the article remains the same as the first article and is directed toward Israel in the coming months to say be careful what you wish for, and even more careful as to how you achieve it. Only unity in opposition parties has any chance of changing the status quo.