Another disastrous week for Keir Starmer has left Andy Burnham a step closer to replacing him as prime minister this summer.
If Burnham wins a parliamentary by-election in Makerfield , north-west England on Thursday, he is poised to move quickly to oust Starmer and secure what he hopes will be a uncontested handover of power, some of his supporters told Bloomberg, speaking on condition of anonymity discussing plans that aren’t public.
Their calculation is that the dramatic resignation of Defense Secretary John Healey on Thursday has ended any hope Starmer had of survival and left him too weak to fight on. Healey quit unexpectedly, in protest at Starmer’s refusal to agree to sufficiently higher military expenditure. In an incendiary resignation letter , he effectively accused the premier of failing to defend the country.
A defiant Starmer insisted · on Friday that he would contest any leadership election triggered by Burnham. “I don’t think it should happen but if it does then I will fight,” he said in an interview with the BBC. “That’s not about personal vanity. It’s not about stubbornness. It’s out of a very deep sense of duty.”
Yet Burnham’s supporters think Starmer will have little choice but to relent in the days after the Makerfield election. In order to challenge for the premier’s job, Burnham first needs to win the seat, an outcome that’s widely expected by Labour members of Parliament, bookmakers and pollsters.
The Greater Manchester mayor’s allies believe he can then quickly secure the public backing of more than 250 Labour MPs, far above the 81 needed to trigger a challenge under party rules, demonstrating Starmer no longer has the confidence of his party.
They calculate rival contenders — including former Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Al Carns, who resigned as a junior defense minister alongside Healey — simply don’t have the numbers to enter a contest.
The pivotal question, they said, is how the cabinet reacts in the days after the Makerfield result, assuming Burnham wins. His supporters want ministers to tell Starmer to agree to an orderly handover.
Until Healey walked out, Starmer’s allies believed he retained a path to survival. Most senior cabinet members would resist Burnham’s overtures and back the PM to stay, they thought. But government officials now say Healey’s departure has shifted that calculus, making it more likely the cabinet collectively tells the prime minister he shouldn’t contest Burnham.
Burnham is said by supporters to be open to either an immediate takeover or an orderly transition in which Starmer agrees a date later this summer. They denied he was planning to delay a challenge until after the Manchester mayoralty election that will be triggered if he wins Makerfield.
| Read More on UK politics: |
|---|
The mood among Starmer’s allies is souring. Some, previously loyal, are now openly critical of the premier.
Several wish he had insisted on cutting welfare and net zero projects to pay for higher defense spending. He could have sacked Energy Secretary Ed Miliband from the cabinet if necessary, they argue. Multiple government officials said they cannot understand how Miliband and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood — who they believe privately worked with Burnham on a plan to oust the prime minister — remain in post while Healey is gone. One Starmer loyalist called it proof of the prime minister’s lack of authority, political judgment and decision-making.
Other Starmer supporters are critical of Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves, saying she fought Healey tooth and nail by arguing that defense is a wasteful department that lacks credible spending plans. Her resistance, they say, caused Starmer to renege on commitments he had made at the Munich Security Conference in February to prioritize defense. He was left, according to this version of events, with little option but to overrule Healey, the military’s chiefs and National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell.
Allies of Reeves counter that it is her job to make the numbers add up, and that if Starmer wanted more for defense, he should have imposed deeper cuts elsewhere, but was unwilling to do so. Friends of the chancellor have been quietly making the case that she should stay on under Burnham, arguing that she’d signal stability to the markets. The Manchester mayor’s supporters, however, said he won’t reappoint her — despite concerns that a Burnham coronation, with a new chancellor, could disturb the bond market and raise the government’s cost of borrowing.
Keeping Reeves would not be in line with the change Burnham is promising, one said. Burnham’s allies also said they spoke to Reeves in recent weeks and came away believing she would help persuade Starmer to accept an orderly handover, only for her not to follow through.
In an interview with the Times newspaper on Saturday, Burnham suggested he would fund more defense spending by reducing the welfare bill, without providing details. He said he would “tread carefully” when it comes to taxation, pledging to pursue a “pro-growth agenda.”
The turmoil is rattling Britain’s allies. Next week Starmer will attend the Group of Seven summit in France, setting up awkward meetings with European leaders and President Donald Trump, who will likely be unimpressed by his defense policy and view him as a lame duck.
In recent days, European diplomats have contacted UK counterparts to complain about uncertainty over Britain’s defense spending plans, the slow pace of the promised uplift and Healey’s exit, according to people familiar with the matter. They have asked for detail on Burnham’s foreign and defense policy, the people said, but UK officials have been unable to provide answers.
That points to the scale of the inheritance awaiting Burnham should he reach Downing Street this summer. He would immediately confront a restive military demanding billions of pounds that he would rather spend on other priorities.
Burnham’s critics within the Labour Party argue he has never said anything of substance on defense or foreign affairs, shows little interest in the brief and has no plan. It is not implausible that within months a British prime minister could be drawn into negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine, a government official said. They asked if you could imagine Burnham doing that, especially with Powell likely to leave alongside Starmer.
Starmer’s crisis has also obscured Burnham’s own stumbles. His misstep over so-called WASPI women — when he appeared to commit billions in unfunded spending to compensate victims of the pensions controversy before rowing back — was, one Labour critic said, evidence he isn’t ready for the top job. It was largely overshadowed by Healey’s resignation.
MPs on both the right and left of the party are also uneasy about Burnham’s immigration plans. One aide described his proposal to end asylum-hotel contracts and shift responsibility for housing migrants to local authorities as ill-advised and politically toxic.
Labour MPs ended the week in despair about their party’s prospects. Starmer looks finished, one said, citing Healey’s charge that the prime minister was effectively “unable” to govern. Yet Burnham, they said, has no obvious plan and keeps making basic errors that foreshadow another troubled premiership. The ruling party, they added, appears to have no other options.