Not again!

Yes, again!

For those of you living outside the UK who might not have been bombarded from all sides about the current shenanigans in Westminster, Keir Starmer is the 6^th Prime Minister (PM) of the UK to go within 10 years. As of 22 June, having spoken to the King (the real King, see below) Starmer resigned from his post saying he recognised he had to go with ‘good grace’ but would stay on until another Leader of the Labour Party (and consequently PM) is appointed. Indeed, a 7^th PM is rapidly being anointed, and that is not a typo as it is widely believed that Starmer’s successor will undergo a ‘coronation’ rather than a contest.

What I’m aiming to do is ask why is this happening, as in, why the chaos of yet another PM? For that we need to look at the wider context. We also need to look closer at Starmer himself and his leadership to find the reasons why Labour MPs have lost the confidence in their leader,

Finally, who is this King of the North (that’s both a reference to the probable new PM – and to Game of Thrones) what is his record, what are his beliefs and views on life, what is his record, and crucially what are his ideas and policies for his government?

In other words, who is Andy Burnham?

The Context

I think it would be remiss of me to not to point to the fact that 2026 is the 10-year anniversary of the UK leaving the EU. Now what I intend to do is write an entire blog on that subject so note I am skating over the subject. And in that blog, that will come soon, I will give you the figures and sources to back up the fact that we are poorer for leaving in so many ways: economically of course, that goes without saying.

But there is something else. Leaving the EU unleashed an instability into our political system and a loss of identity. Where do we stand now we are out of Europe? Who and what is this country? This identity has not yet been set in stone and if we step back and think about it, the loss of 6 Prime Ministers in 10 years, and a 7^th on the horizon shortly, is one aspect of, what one could call, this floundering instability that we the British people, and our Prime Ministers, have brought upon ourselves.

Intermingled with this is the growth of social media with some people getting all their facts and figures and ideas from X and Facebook. Furthermore, there has been a significant growth of the Right (plus the Greens and Lib Dems) leading to a 5-political party system instead of the straightforward 2-party fight between the old Tory party and Labour.

Social media has also coarsened our dealings with politicians allowing much anonymous animosity to be directed to politicians on certain subjects; immigration being the number one topic in many people’s minds (I refer you back to one of my posts on exactly that subject).

I have said this before and will say it again that no party in the  UK has ever truly dealt with the movement of heavy industry away from our country and the consequent loss of jobs to people involved in those industries. Their loss of identity and the lack of jobs led to the search for another identity. Politicians (and immigrants) are easily seen as the source of people’s challenging lives and much hate has surfaced both on social media, and indeed within politics. There are certain privileged people (who will be nameless) picking up on these ‘vibes’ and exploiting the mood of today.

Consequently, the pace of politics today is fast and Starmer is the latest to fall by the wayside.

Starmer

One pundit has said that future historians will be scratching their heads at the downfall of Starmer, as in, ‘why did this happen, after all he’s a decent man thought of as a steady hand desperately needed after the ghastly antics of Johnson and Truss’.

Indeed, there were no scandals. Well one early on was noted. Starmer accepted some free designer specs and his wife a couple of dresses. Foolish, but in comparison to….you know who, the glasses hardly register on the corruption scale.

After all, this is a man who two years ago won a landslide election. Labour won 411 seats giving the party a 174-seat majority, it’s best since 2001. However, it is important to note that Labour’s vote share was 33.7% which does suggest that Proportional Representation would be a fairer system than the current first-past-the-post system.

Nevertheless, it was a fantastic result. And yet, and yet, his popularity has plummeted and he is rated at -45% (tbh I’m not sure what that means but it doesn’t look good). And in the local council elections in May Labour lost 1,498 council seats and also lost control of 38 councils causing many MPs, who saw their majorities, both large and small, disappearing in the next General Election, to question Starmer’s leadership.

So, what happened? Why has Starmer lost the confidence of his MPs and lost all credibility with so many in the UK?

The point I am going to make first is that Starmer’s rise to power was remarkably swift. His first career was in law. He had a solid background as a high-ranking lawyer ending as the Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008-2013 and only entered Parliament as an MP for a London borough in 2015. Within 5 years he became Leader of the Opposition, which, one has to admit, is a meteoric rise.  Note that this was not just a question of luck. However, I do not have time here to examine all the ins and outs of this rise to power.  But it would be true to say that Starmer, first and foremost, had ambition and, crucially, had allies to help him to his post.

Come the General Election in 2024, with Starmer at the head of the Labour Party, it did appear that in contrast to the Conservatives, Labour was the grown-up in the room. Above all, Labour was not the Conservative party. Did the huge majority occur because Starmer was at the head of the not-the-Tory-party? That is a definite possibility.

However, once in power what was the plan? Ah yes, what indeed. I suggest that Starmer had huge ambition to get himself and the Labour party into power. But once there, he did not know how to be a Prime Minister or what to do. And – there was no plan.

Why am I saying that, when I know there are people who liked this steady, managerial hand taking charge, and continue to like Starmer, seeing him as, yes, lacking in charisma but you know, that’s good? He is just getting on with the job.

But I suggest that he did not have a ‘story’, a ‘narrative’, an ‘idea’ to take the country forward. To be a Prime Minister you have be more than just a steady manager, you have to connect, you have to enthuse, you have to inspire and if you have to give bad news to the country – which he did – there needs to be some brighter light at the end of it all. And note, this is the only time I am going to say this. The new Labour government inherited a huge financial mess and hugely run-down public services, and all due to the policies of the Conservative party. So yes, there was much to deal with when Starmer became PM.

But could he inspire? Could he give the British public some hope that the bad situation would somehow be overcome? Unfortunately, he, and the government were weak communicators.  The late, great Glenda Jackson (Oscar nominated actor and later a Labour MP) said, she wished Starmer would get some voice coaching. Sadly, he did not seek this out (Mrs Thatcher did – she lowered her voice) and consequently he spoke to the country with an irritatingly nasal and staccato voice. Furthermore, his speeches were dull. His one message was – growth, growth, growth. Which is exactly right and proper. But what does that mean to a struggling family hardly able to pay the bills. He was a very poor communicator.

He was also fixated on getting back the Labour voters who had voted for Farage by edging further and further rightwards. This lost him many Labour voters who would not ever vote for Farage. Indeed, much effort there was wasted as the recent by-election in Makerfield shows there is a considerable number of people who would vote for anyone other than Farage.

The worst of this turn rightwards was his speech on immigration where he said, ‘we are becoming an island of strangers’. (An aside here, if he ever goes to an NHS hospital – for anything – I think he should feel some shame for that phrase as the NHS would collapse without its foreign health workers.) When that blew up into a huge row Starmer, of course, retracted that statement and said he regretted that.

But the damage was done.

And that retraction was rather typical as Starmer and his government made many U-turns on this policy and that, and especially on the cancelling of the Winter Fuel Payment for pensioners apart from those on Pension Credit. Which again caused a huge furore hence the benefit was re-instated with a few tweaks, including the choice to opt-out.

I agree that both our entitlement to social benefits with its consequent huge cost to the nation and immigration numbers (see my post on this) are issues that do need dealing with. But both need careful handling. Politicians need to be perceptive to the current vibe and know how to deal with sensitive issues.

What I am saying here is that Starmer lacked that political skill essential to all those who hold power, which is to not only be able to communicate – you need to have people skills.

This lack of people skills was again evident inside Parliament where it has been observed (see source below) that Starmer never courted his MPs, especially the new MPs voted in at the General Election 2024. The glad-handing and the getting -to-know-you meetings you must have to build up a loyal base would be understood by any person who has risen through the Labour party and climbed that slippery pole to power. But remember Starmer only came into Parliament 11 years ago. He does not understand how politicians and politics (with a small p) works.

Consequently, his supporters now are very few. And most Labour MPs are jostling to surround the King of the North and get his attention. That is the fast pace of politics today – Starmer is yesterday’s man.

That is actually, quite sad as, despite everything I’ve said about Starmer, in the two years that Starmer was in power his government has achieved a lot. There you go again. As one pundit said, recently (see below for source) any Prime Minister other than Starmer would be congratulating himself with what he has done (as would the public). It is the lack of good coms, the inability to get the good things that have happened across to the public that also has greatly contributed to his downfall.

So, what has Starmer achieved?

I expect this will come as a bit of shock to most, but there has been a record drop in immigration. Net migration has fallen mainly due to fewer health and care visas being issued. Mind you, let’s consider this for a moment. Does that mean more vacancies for carers who visit old people in their own homes, and also fewer medical and nursing staff?  Personally, I’m not sure that was a great thing to do.

Other figures show fewer people entering through the Ukrainian and Afghanistan schemes, restrictions on student and worker visas and a doubling of time to qualify for permanent residence. Finally, does anyone know this? This year fewer people have arrived by boat.

Again I ask, does the public know about this? Obviously not as a recent poll shows 86% of the population thought there was either great or a fair amount of tension between immigrants and people born in the UK. Should I insert the word ‘brown’ into that sentence? I repeat, just get sent to any hospital appointment, any A&E department and I wonder how many feel ‘tension’ when they see the staff?

Another successful area is around hospital waiting lists. These statistics show that the number of people waiting more than 18 weeks were down by 21% in April 2026. Still nowhere near perfect but it is a drop.

With regard to housing, apparently Starmer promised 1.5 million more houses by the next parliament. Which means 300,000 must be built per year. After 18 months Labour has delivered 300,000 homes. Whether these homes are affordable, I would argue, is more the point.

What delays or puts developers off building more housing is the cost and restrictive planning regulations. Labour has loosened planning rules, however costs continue to grow. Bricks, for example, have over ten years, increased in price by 80%.

There has also been a significant rise in the production of green energy. For the first time ever more than half of the UK’s electricity generation has come from renewable energy. Renewable energy sources have outstripped fossil fuels even in winter.  Which is amazing and should have been shouted from the rooftops. Instead, I rather fear people are backtracking from the idea of Net Zero, which is awful. I could say more, but that is another blog.

And a personal best for Starmer is around foreign affairs. He’s been good at that, mostly. I’ll start with his successes. On the international front Starmer was genuinely respected. Moreover, he has always supported Ukraine. He was excellent when Trump wanted to drag all of Nato into an illegal, inessential war against Iran. He said, a straightforward NO. And good for him as this war is a right old mess that will have repercussions for aeons, not that Trump thinks beyond the next 5 minutes apart from making money.

What he didn’t do quite so well with was being a bit feeble with Trump. I truly believe all Europeans should behave more like Canada and Carney and not bow and scrape. He was also very slow to draw the line on Israel and say enough, and of course we still sell arms to Israel although there are some restrictions. Would any politician stop those sales? Again, that’s another story, and another blog.

And finally, back to mistakes or missteps but linked to Israel. Having Palestinian Action (a protest group) designated as a terrorist group (under the Terrorism Act 2000) and arresting pensioners for holding up signs or even pieces of paper saying ‘I support Palestinian Action’ is nuts.

If I was fitter and had fewer health issues I would be joining those pensioners. At some point you have to make a stand against genocide, and these brave people are taking a stand. I do hope one of the first things that Andy Burnham does is rescind that ruling that Palestinian Action is a terrorist group.

Burnham

Ah yes, Burnham – now who is he?  Well, for those of you who live outside the UK and have never heard of the man, Burnham is not a newcomer to politics or to Parliament.

He served as a Labour MP for Leigh from 2001 to 2017 and held several senior roles including Secretary of State for Health from 2009 to 2010 under Gordon Brown. In 2017 he became the Mayor of Manchester, serving for 3 terms, and gaining much popularity there. His most successful venture was re-shaping Manchester’s transport through a locally controlled public transport system called the Bee Network that integrated buses, trams and eventually local trains under one umbrella.

 And now Burnham has left his Mayoral duties and won the Makerfield by-election by a thumping majority, which incidentally was seen as a challenge (it was even thought that he might lose) as the May local elections wiped out Labour councillors and brought in huge numbers of Reform people.  Moreover, with Burnham back in Parliament he is now poised to be our next Prime Minister, as it looks as though no-one in the Labour Parliamentary Party is going to oppose him.

Interestingly, you have to realise that all of these manoeuvres have been talked about for years. This is not happenstance that Burnham has just appeared on the scene. Once people in the Parliamentary Labour Party (and the public) realised that Starmer was a bad communicator, the idea that Burnham might replace Starmer came to the fore. Indeed, there has been a discrete group of people within the Labour Party dedicated to just that.

So, this has not come from out of the blue.

OK, you say, Burnham is not a newcomer and people want him to the next PM. But who is he?

I shall be writing many, many pieces on Burnham but suffice to say, he identifies as being of the soft left. So in other words, left of Starmer but definitely not a Jeremy Corbyn. He has been a successful mayor and he knows his way around Parliament. Above all, he is a good communicator and generally well-liked.

Ok, he’s a nice person, popular, speaks well and connects easily with people, and furthermore has shown his mettle in Manchester.

Yes, yes, but what are his policies? What is he going to do that is different to Starmer?

And will anything change?

Now that is interesting. What indeed are his policies and ideas?  We are not really, totally aware of what policies Burnham might introduce. Or how things might be different. Burnham and his acolytes have a lot of work to do as he could be in post by the middle of July.

However, in a recent speech he has set out what could be called a political blueprint for the UK under his tenure. And I give you his ideas, thoughts and vision in bullet points.

• Greater devolution including extending more devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

• A hub for no 10 in the north – in Manchester

• Reform of Westminster and Whitehall – changing the atmosphere of discontent through empowering backbenchers to change things in their local area

• Greater power over utilities including water and energy

• Larger numbers of council houses to be built

• Reform of business rates to support the High Street

• Safeguarding manufacturing and production capabilities in various industries including defence, energy and food production

• A complete rethink on education that focuses far too much on university. Instead developing technical education and looking especially at the rise of young people not in education, employment or training

• Ten-year plans regarding the cost of living

• All above to be based on solid public finances

Well, how about that? What do you think?

I mean there is, of course, more substance to these points but even so I found myself saying at a couple of these, OK, yes, umm, what, and how?  And I’ve not heard the phrase a 10-yr plan for some time. With others I thought – bring it on, Andy!

For starters, you have to admit that a hub in Manchester is different and maybe one step on towards reducing the great north and south divide and the London-centric pull that exists in the UK. Bring that on. Plus do bring on the manufacturing of defence weapons as our reliance on the US is dire. Please can we wean ourselves away from this and build up a more European arms industry.

However, I can just feel the pressure on any government to not do such a thing will be enormous. And, indeed, the Right-wing press we have is biding its time.

So Andy, watch out, you inherit the same country as Starmer did, the same toxic press, the same toxic social media, the same problems, and crucially, the same financial situation. But. I do wish Burnham the very best of luck as I too have always wanted Burnham to lead the Labour Party and the country as he is a great and accomplished communicator.

Let’s give him a chance.

Penny Kocher 30 June 2026

Further reading:

Richard Partington, Jessica Elgot, What is Andy Burnham’s economic and political blueprint for Britain? The Guardian, 29 June 2026

William Davies, Burnham’s Political Economy. The London Review of Books, 26 June 2026

Tom Clark, The Prime Minister was broken by his inability to govern as himself. Prospect Magazine, 22 June 2026

Pippa Crerar, Kiran Stacey, Jessica Elgot, Andy Burnham pipares for power as emotional Keir Starmer bows out. The Guardian 22 June 2026

Jonathan Freedland, The Rise and Fall of Keir Starmer: where did it all go wrong? The Guardian, 22 June 2026

Peter Walker, Frozen by the challenges of power: how Starmer turned triumph into  tragedy. The Guardian, 22 June 2026

James Meek, Burnham’s Learning. The London Review of Books, 4 June 2026

Also: The Rest is Politics podcast with Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart on Starmer’s lack of people skills.

and The Private Eye podcast on the resignation of Starmer, and how future historians will ‘scratch their heads as to why Starmer resigned’.