Labour is in meltdown after the decision to block Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham from running in the byelection for Gorton and Denton. Party leader Keir Starmer and his allies voted strongly against Burnham’s bid, stoking fears of internal war. Furious Labour MPs and unions branded this move a "huge mistake," slamming Starmer's leadership as out of touch and destructive.

Tensions boiled over as the party's top brass—the NEC—cited potential chaos and hefty costs as reasons to prevent Burnham's candidacy. They argued a mayoral byelection would disrupt Greater Manchester midway through Burnham's term and strain resources ahead of crucial ballots in May.

But the clamor was deafening! Union leader Andrea Egan vowed resistance, denouncing the decision as "blatant gerrymandering." Many Labour figures, from Ed Miliband to Sadiq Khan, rallied behind Burnham, calling the move a betrayal and a loss. Burnham, left fuming, hit out at the party's direction under Starmer, warning it could hand victory to Reform UK in the byelection.

Starmer faces backlash from all corners. MPs worry this will deepen party rifts and cost them seats, with many accusing him of feared "factionalism." They argue Burnham, popular as the "King of the North," could strengthen Labour’s chances—not weaken them.

Looking forward, Starmer’s grip on leadership feels shaky. Allies insist blocking Burnham shores up stability and sidesteps a power struggle, but the price might be steep! With the NEC vote crushing Burnham's hopes 8-1, Starmer’s gamble could backfire disastrously.

Key Takeaways:

• Starmer's blockade threatens Labour's unity and voter loyalty.

• Burnham’s exclusion sparks outrage and risks Reform UK’s gain.

• Potential internal crisis could escalate ahead of upcoming elections.

  

Adapted by ASEAN Now from source 2026-01-25

 

 

View full article

Standing to be mayor then dumping those who voted for him to apply for another job seems a bit flighty. How can the voters know he won't change his mind again about representing them?

"Running Scared"? (Roy Orbison)

Starmer is hopefully on his way out!

3 hours ago, Purdey said:

Standing to be mayor then dumping those who voted for him to apply for another job seems a bit flighty. How can the voters know he won't change his mind again about representing them?

Indeed, it is all about Burnham's personal ambition.

He knew at the beginning of 2024 that both the mayoral election and a general election would be held within 18 months. If he felt that he could better serve the nation as a MP, then he should not have stood for mayor. I would also question what more he thinks that he can do to help the people of Gorton and Denton that he cannot already do as Mayor of Manchester.

This is yet another PR disaster for Labour. Burnham looks (and is) an opportunist. However, by stopping him from standing Starmer looks like an autocrat.

This government's ability to inflict self-imposed wounds seems to be boundless.

Another bum career politician who's never had a proper job in his life.

If Burnham is really serious about returning to Westminster and challenging Starmer, he should put the cat amongst the pigeons and resign as Mayor.

That way, he will remove the reason given by NEC for blocking him from standing in the by election.

Pathetic decision from Starmer and the N.E.C, which will undoubtedly come back to bite them if Labour loses the seat to either Reform or the Greens.

Burnham is just like all the other Liebour rats. Look up Raja Miah and read about Burnhams part in the cover up of the Pakistani rape gangs

11 minutes ago, lavender19 said:

Burnham is just like all the other Liebour rats. Look up Raja Miah and read about Burnhams part in the cover up of the Pakistani rape gangs

They all tried covering it up. Even the socialist posters here. Then denied any coverup ever took place while seething with rage at sir Tommy of Luton who single-handedly made the public aware and boy did they make him pay.

3 hours ago, Summerinsiam said:

Pathetic decision from Starmer and the N.E.C, which will undoubtedly come back to bite them if Labour loses the seat to either Reform or the Greens.

It's not like they have a wafer thin majority in the Commons.

Both sides are gerrymandering, by the way.

Democracy.

Labour sty.

5 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

If Burnham is really serious about returning to Westminster and challenging Starmer, he should put the cat amongst the pigeons and resign as Mayor.

That way, he will remove the reason given by NEC for blocking him from standing in the by election.

I don't see how that will further Burnham's cause. He will lose his power and influence (as Mayor) and be out in the cold hoping that a winnable constituency comes along pretty quickly. Even assuming that it does there are, at least, a couple significant obstacles to Burnham actually being selected as a candidate. Firstly, the seat would have to be in the North West. Local Labour membership elsewhere are unlikely to shortlist him and the NEC certainly won't parachute Burnham into a seat. Secondly, the NEC could insist on an all-women shortlist.

Imo it is difficult to see where Burnham goes from here. If Labour win the next GE in '28 or '29 then it almost certainly won't be under Burnham's leadership. Even if he stood and won a seat, given those circumstances, it is difficult to see how Burnham could launch a leadership bid before 2030 at the very earliest. If Labour lose the next GE, if elected Burnham could win a leadership contest. However, he would be Leader of the Opposition and in this scenario, it is difficult to see how he could become PM before 2033 which is a long time to wait.

6 hours ago, RayC said:

Indeed, it is all about Burnham's personal ambition.

He knew at the beginning of 2024 that both the mayoral election and a general election would be held within 18 months. If he felt that he could better serve the nation as a MP, then he should not have stood for mayor. I would also question what more he thinks that he can do to help the people of Gorton and Denton that he cannot already do as Mayor of Manchester.

This is yet another PR disaster for Labour. Burnham looks (and is) an opportunist. However, by stopping him from standing Starmer looks like an autocrat.

This government's ability to inflict self-imposed wounds seems to be boundless.

Good post, also Labour are worried, the cost of a Mayoral election 4 million GBP has been mentioned ( where that comes from I do not know) and that someone from Reform will get the job, that would be interesting.

37 minutes ago, RayC said:

I don't see how that will further Burnham's cause. He will lose his power and influence (as Mayor) and be out in the cold hoping that a winnable constituency comes along pretty quickly. Even assuming that it does there are, at least, a couple significant obstacles to Burnham actually being selected as a candidate. Firstly, the seat would have to be in the North West. Local Labour membership elsewhere are unlikely to shortlist him and the NEC certainly won't parachute Burnham into a seat. Secondly, the NEC could insist on an all-women shortlist.

Imo it is difficult to see where Burnham goes from here. If Labour win the next GE in '28 or '29 then it almost certainly won't be under Burnham's leadership. Even if he stood and won a seat, given those circumstances, it is difficult to see how Burnham could launch a leadership bid before 2030 at the very earliest. If Labour lose the next GE, if elected Burnham could win a leadership contest. However, he would be Leader of the Opposition and in this scenario, it is difficult to see how he could become PM before 2033 which is a long time to wait.

Resign now and get the candidacy for the up coming by election.

54 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Resign now and get the candidacy for the up coming by election.

The NEC will refuse to endorse Burnham's selection.

8 minutes ago, RayC said:

The NEC will refuse to endorse Burnham's selection.

They'll have to change their excuses.

The merits of allowing Burnham to stand will then also out weigh the negative aspects.

They'll have to allow him to stand.

Starmer too cowardly to face a challenge.

The pathetic weasel.

27 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Starmer too cowardly to face a challenge.

The pathetic weasel.

You're not a closet supporter of Burnham, are you Jonny?

Right on for public ownership, universal social care through a National Care Service and 'radical realism', e.g.

wealth taxes, lifting the two-child benefit cap, and further nationalization of key industries, all causes close to Burnham's heart.

Starmer's not stupid enough to let the Labour Party tear itself apart like the Tories, changing leader every few months.

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Starmer too cowardly to face a challenge.

The pathetic weasel.

Careful mate, skating on thin ice here. We all know you actually mean sir Kier is the greatest kindest dear leader ever🤣

11 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

They'll have to change their excuses.

The merits of allowing Burnham to stand will then also out weigh the negative aspects.

They'll have to allow him to stand.

It will not happen. There is simply not enough time.

The by-election will take place on 26 February. Labour have already selected a list of prospective candidates and plan to name their candidate no later than 31 January.

10 hours ago, bannork said:

You're not a closet supporter of Burnham, are you Jonny?

Right on for public ownership, universal social care through a National Care Service and 'radical realism', e.g.

wealth taxes, lifting the two-child benefit cap, and further nationalization of key industries, all causes close to Burnham's heart.

Starmer's not stupid enough to let the Labour Party tear itself apart like the Tories, changing leader every few months.

Starmer is a dead man walking and he knows it. If Labour are wiped out in the May elections as expected, there will be a leadership challenge whether he likes it or not. There must be a change in direction and personnel if they are to stop voter defection to the Greens, and counter the existential threat that Reform pose to the future of the country.

56 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

Starmer is a dead man walking and he knows it. If Labour are wiped out in the May elections as expected, there will be a leadership challenge whether he likes it or not. There must be a change in direction and personnel if they are to stop voter defection to the Greens, and counter the existential threat that Reform pose to the future of the country.

Not easy when you're in charge of a broad church. Tighten up immigration, get people off welfare, and the left wing of the party kick up, losing votes to the greens.

Then if you're soft on welfare and immigration you lose votes to Reform.

Starmer and Reeves stressed economic growth as their goal, greater employment, higher wages and inflation under control. Difficult to see this happening without greater economic unity with the EU.

Still, I don't see any of his rivals doing better apart from the Home Secretary, Mahmood.