logo
The leadership rumours inside Labour that speak volumes about Starmer's future

The leadership rumours inside Labour that speak volumes about Starmer's future

Independent10 hours ago
The images of Rachel Reeves crying on the frontbenches during PMQs on Wednesday – just hours after the government was forced into a humiliating £5bn climbdown on welfare – were stark. It looked like Sir Keir Starmer's top team was on the brink of falling apart.
But the following day, the prime minister came out fighting, insisting his chancellor – who also looked notably more cheery – was here to stay.
A minister in tears would make news any day of the year. But on a day when questions over the prime minister's leadership were already splashed across the papers, just days before he was due to mark one year in office, the image was even more jarring for Labour – and only served to add fuel to growing questions about whether or not he is the right person for the job.
For weeks now, there have been whisperings of a possible leadership bid by Angela Rayner. The housing secretary's repeated attempts to shut down the rumours – saying she has no desire to hold the top job – have done little to dampen speculation.
The rumours speak volumes about the level of disaffection within the party over Sir Keir's leadership and the direction of government.
Labour won a thumping majority at last year's general election. They had a clear mandate to deliver their so-called 'plan for change' and there was a real sense of optimism. But just one year on, that optimism is well and truly gone.
After repeated attempts to reset the narrative, the prime minister's authority has been damaged, while brutal polling shows that voters have turned away.
And this week's humiliating welfare debacle, which saw the PM gut his reforms entirely only to still be faced with the largest rebellion of his premiership so far – has only added to his mounting woes.
Behind the scenes, there is now more wrangling than ever over where Labour goes next.
If Tuesday's welfare vote proved anything, it's that Labour MPs are far more left-wing than their party's leader.
Starmer has been attempting to pull the party to the right both to try to combat the threat posed by Reform, but also to deliver a government that meets the expectations of the British public.
But as a result of failings in Downing Street, and obfuscations from his own MPs, it hasn't worked.
There are now growing calls for a reset in No 10. The problem, however, is that this isn't the first time the prime minister has attempted to do so. We've seen repeated attempts to draw a line under previous mistakes and fumbles from the government, but no real change in direction.
Despite Starmer's insistence that his chancellor is here to stay, there is a growing feeling that without a reshuffle, the PM will be unable to truly draw a line under the past year.
If he can accompany that with both a clear plan to plug gaps in the public finances after several U-turns – including Tuesday's welfare chaos and previous rowbacks on winter fuel payments – alongside a genuine strategy to bring down immigration, he may be able to turn his fortunes around.
But if that fails, and Starmer is unable to use a reshuffle to save some of his own authority, there is a small but growing chance the prime minister will be booted out before the next election.
Championed by the so-called 'soft left', there is now a developing feeling within Labour that if the party, led by Rayner, provided a true left-wing offering (and did it well), that could be a far more effective counter to the divisive politics of Reform UK than Starmer's pragmatism. Especially given Nigel Farage's proposals to lift the two child benefit cap and restore winter fuel payments to all seem to have gone down remarkably well with the British public.
But sitting to the right of Rayner is Wes Streeting – also seen as a strong contender to succeed the PM. He's well-liked by the party, as of last month being the third most popular Labour politician among party members – behind Rayner and Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, who is not currently a Labour MP.
He's so far proven himself a safe pair of hands when it comes to the health service, and has led one of the few departments that seems to be somewhat successfully implementing the change they promised.
While allies of both Streeting and Rayner are attempting to shut down fevered speculation over possible leadership bids, a number of party insiders see the local elections in May next year as the deadline for when a decision would need to be made on the party's future.
But there is an important health warning that needs to accompany any talk of replacing Starmer. He won a massive majority. The Tory years, which saw Britain run by three different prime ministers in two months, shouldn't fool anyone into thinking replacing him will be an easy task.
The only official way to remove an incumbent leader of the party is for 20 per cent of Labour MPs to nominate a willing candidate to stand against the leader, triggering a leadership contest. With Labour's current majority, that would require at least 80 MPs to get behind a single candidate – no easy task.
Therefore, the chance of Starmer being replaced is, at present, small. But the clock is ticking. Voters are currently unconvinced that Labour is anything different from the '14 years of Tory failure' that Starmer so often talks about. Every day that this sentiment is allowed to fester, the likelihood of a coup increases.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rachel Reeves should be as open as possible about tax rises
Rachel Reeves should be as open as possible about tax rises

The Independent

time35 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Rachel Reeves should be as open as possible about tax rises

It has been clear for months that taxes were likely to rise in the Budget this autumn. Rachel Reeves left herself so little margin for error in last year's Budget that any bad fiscal news would mean that she would have to come back for more. Almost from the moment the chancellor sat down after delivering last year's speech, the bad fiscal news has come thick and fast. She sought to stay on track in March by announcing savings in welfare spending, but those have now been blocked by her own MPs. Before that, the prime minister announced a U-turn on means-testing the winter fuel payment, restoring it to most pensioners. Meanwhile, the global economic outlook has worsened and tax revenues have fallen behind the forecast. The question now is not whether she will have to raise taxes, but whether she can do so without breaking Labour's manifesto promises not to raise any of the taxes that produce the bulk of the government's revenue: income tax, national insurance and VAT. Jim O'Neill, the former Conservative minister who advised Ms Reeves in opposition, tells The Independent today that, 'without changing some of the big taxes', the chancellor cannot make her sums add up. 'The past few days should force government to truly prioritise,' he says, 'and, crucially, recognise it can't deliver on all three of its fiscal rules, growth mission and manifesto tax commitments. Something has to give.' The Independent 's view is that we are not quite at that point yet. It may still be possible for Ms Reeves to raise the sums of money required without breaking into the 'big three' taxes – or even into the fourth, corporation tax, which Labour has also promised not to raise. But any prudent chancellor needs to be prepared for more news on the downside. She needs to take the British people into her confidence and explain that, painful as last year's Budget was, it may be necessary to take further painful decisions this year. If she does have to break manifesto promises – as opposed to merely bending them with sophistry about the incidence of taxation on 'working people' with her increase in employers' national insurance contributions – she needs to persuade people that the alternatives are worse. She needs to explain that she cannot simply 'relax the fiscal rules' and borrow more, as some of the voices from her own party seem to imagine. She did this rather well at a conference of CEOs last month: 'Fine, we can change the fiscal rules to borrow more. What would happen? Gilt yields would go up more, so the cost of servicing the whole stock of debts goes up. The fiscal rules aren't a construct that we've pulled out of thin air, they're to meet the real constraints that exist – that if we want to borrow somebody has to be willing to buy those bonds.' But she, the prime minister and whoever is the minister for the morning news round need to make this argument repeatedly. Then she – and they – need to explain why it is so hard to cut public spending. Labour MPs may have been guilty of wishful thinking about the consequences, but they were not wrong to block the rushed and crude cuts to personal independence payments that Ms Reeves wanted. It has been reported that the chancellor, rather sulkily, wants the Labour rebels to take the blame for the tax rises that will follow: it would be better if she could set out a better path to welfare reform that might end up saving money rather than starting from the demand for cuts. There are still many options for tax rises that do not touch manifesto promises. Ms Reeves could perhaps explain to some of her ill-informed backbench colleagues why a wealth tax is a bad idea that has been abandoned in every country that has tried it. She could go on to explain that there are other ideas that could achieve the same objective. Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, helpfully set out a few small-ticket items in her memo in March. Beyond that, the freeze in income tax thresholds could be extended. Tax reliefs for pensions remain an unjustified benefit for the better-off. A mansion tax on properties worth more than £2m is long overdue. Openness and transparency have never been the watchwords of the Treasury in tax policy. Chancellors have tended to hoard their power to surprise people with the big decisions at Budgets. But this chancellor and this government are in an unusually difficult situation. Ms Reeves needs to explain the trade-offs behind the difficult decisions that she is about to make if she wants people to support them.

People wait months to get help on key benefit - including one very long delay
People wait months to get help on key benefit - including one very long delay

Daily Mirror

time44 minutes ago

  • Daily Mirror

People wait months to get help on key benefit - including one very long delay

Data uncovered by the Liberal Democrats show the average wait time for a decision under the scheme was 57 days in the last year People with mental health conditions or disabilities are waiting months to get help under the government's Access to Work scheme, figures show. Data uncovered by the Liberal Democrats show the average wait time for a decision under the scheme was 57 days in the last year. ‌ And one person had to wait 393 days. ‌ The government's Access to Work scheme helps people get or stay in work if they have a physical or mental health condition or disability. It can include a grant to help pay for practical support with work, support managing mental health at work or money to pay for communication support at job interviews. But the Lib Dems argue slow progress through the system can disincentivise employers from offering jobs to disabled people as they can hire non-disabled people into roles faster. The figures emerged after a furious backbench rebellion forced Labour to drop elements of its welfare reform plan which would have cut billions of pounds from the benefits bill. 'This is no way to make legislation let alone run a country,' Daisy Cooper, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesperson said 'The past week has caused anxiety and confusion for all those who were at risk of being affected by these changes.' ‌ Responding to a written question from Ms Cooper, Work and Pensions minister Stephen Timms said: 'We are committed to reducing waiting times for Access to Work and are considering the best way to deliver that for customers. 'We have increased the number of staff processing Access to Work claims and applications from customers who are about to start a job or who are renewing are prioritised.' He added that the Government's benefits reform green paper included plans to improve Access to Work, and 'we are considering further options to reduce the waiting time for customers.' ‌ She added: 'The original bill would have stripped support from disabled people and those who care for them and actually put up more barriers to work rather than bringing them down. 'The Government must accept that this gutted bill is not fit for purpose, withdraw the legislation and come forward with a properly thought through proposal to reduce welfare spending without targeting those in desperate need of support. 'That means speeding up Access to Work decisions, ending the crisis in our NHS so people can go back to their jobs rather than languishing in pain, and making people's money go further, such as by introducing an energy social tariff.'

Urgent action urged over Shropshire Council's finances
Urgent action urged over Shropshire Council's finances

BBC News

timean hour ago

  • BBC News

Urgent action urged over Shropshire Council's finances

Urgent management intervention is needed to "secure corrections" to help Shropshire Council's "unacceptable" finances, a senior officer has director James Walton predicted an overspend of £13.174m for the end of Walton added that the current savings projection for this financial year, including savings brought forward from the previous year, is £31.438m - about 53% of the total amount to be delivered. The report has gone to the council's cabinet ahead of its meeting on Wednesday and members are warned that, if no more action is taken, the council's unearmarked reserves would be only £600,000. But Mr Walton said the central budget forecast has improved slightly."This change is partly due to better information providing a more robust, if still exceptionally early, view of the financial position, particularly around potential savings delivery," he executive director said the predicted overspend limited the council's ability to cope with unforeseen financial stated: "This is not acceptable or sustainable and requires urgent management intervention in all portfolio areas to secure corrections."Mr Walton said, while it was inevitable not all savings could be delivered exactly to the value planned, there were several areas "where further work to improve the forecast can be progressed".The cabinet was recommended to formally acknowledge that the current information indicated the need for urgent action. This news was gathered by the Local Democracy Reporting Service which covers councils and other public service organisations. Follow BBC Shropshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store