Gaynor Marshall

retired NHS and PHE. also at

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

I'm fearful, Angela, that you will now find yourself consigned to the backbenches for the remainder of this Parliament. It is a real shame, because you are a talented politician who made one significant error and have paid a very heavy price for it. The media then turned on both you and Sir Keir Starmer, and the consequences have been damaging for you both.

I had hoped that, once you received a clean bill of health regarding the allegations against you, and it became clear that there had been no deliberate wrongdoing despite what parts of the press suggested, you would eventually return to government. I believe that would have been thoroughly deserved.

Instead of backing Sir Keir Starmer, you chose to support Andy Burnham in a challenge to his leadership. In doing so, you have attached yourself to a project that offers little beyond personal ambition. Burnham has presented himself as an alternative leader, yet has failed to set out policies or ideas that are materially different, and many of his aspirations could not realistically be delivered within the lifetime of this Parliament. In the space of just a few weeks, he has reversed position on so many issues that it is difficult to know what he genuinely stands for.

I think there is going to be a considerable shock when ordinary Labour Party members, rather than trade union leaders, give their verdict. My view is that they will back Starmer overwhelmingly in any leadership contest.

I have no objection to Andy Burnham serving as a Member of Parliament, or even joining the Government. However, this kind of disloyalty towards a sitting Labour Prime Minister is not something that will be easily forgotten. If Starmer survives, and I believe he will, the political consequences for those who sought to remove him may prove permanent.

[Michael Rosen 💙💙🎓🎓 NICE 爷爷 @MichaelRosenYes]

Can we verify this?
Gaza: 80% of the country destroyed, 100% of the population displaced, and 50% of the deaths children.

[Mohamad Safa @mhdksafa]

“The war in Gaza” is actually “the Genocide in Gaza”

“The war in Lebanon” is actually “the Genocide in Lebanon”

“The not war in Iran” is actually “the illegal war in Iran”

“The heightened tensions with Cuba” is actually “the unilateral U.S. aggression against Cuba”

“Collateral damage and human shields” is actually “murder children and innocent civilians”

The media uses euphemisms to control the narrative. The media is complicit

[kieron murphy @kieronmurphy5]

@PedderSophie @PStrelczak The rest of the world would think that the UK 🇬🇧 had gone mad if we let the media owners’ obsession with getting rid of @Keir_Starmer succeed …and they would be right

[Just me - Thomas @TomSoede]

The interesting thing here is not that everyone suddenly loves Starmer.

It is that outside the Westminster/media bubble, many people seem to understand something very basic:

A country cannot rebuild itself through permanent leadership panic.

Stability is not glamorous.

It does not trend as easily as drama.

It does not feed the pundit class in quite the same way.

But after the Tory circus — five prime ministers, endless faction fights, mini-budgets, resignations, scandals and collapse — stability matters.

You do not have to agree with every decision Starmer makes to understand that.

You do not have to think he is charismatic to understand that.

You only have to ask one question:

Would another leadership war really help the country right now?

For many people outside the bubble, the answer seems to be no.

Country first cannot just be a slogan.

Sometimes it means giving a Prime Minister with a majority the time and space to govern.

If this speaks to you, please repost it — not for me, but for someone who is tired of chaos being sold as politics. And - yeah you guessed it - follow me.

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

Keir Starmer is now recognised as a serious international leader. He has stood alongside President Zelensky, Chancellor Scholz and President Macron at a time when Europe's security faces its greatest challenge in generations.

He has shown he can work with President Trump when necessary and stand up to him when Britain's interests demand it. That is the responsibility of a Prime Minister.

Andy Burnham has spent years as a regional mayor after leaving frontline national politics. Running Greater Manchester is one thing. Representing Britain on the world stage is quite another.

The question is simple. Looking at these pictures, which of these men looks ready to lead Britain through the challenges ahead?

[Viviane: 🌹Labour led by Keir for me @LaindonFEMINIST]

Tell me how does a Mayor who is pitching for a constituency to vote him in as an MP start pitching a GE manifesto? Because he either inherits the current manifesto or he calls an election and stands on his own. This smacks of fantasyland.

[Nerine Halton @NerineHalton]

A little brain worm is whispering to me that the Burnham bid for premiership will fizzle out. I don’t care how much he’s talked up.
Next to Starmer he looks shallow and over confident bearing in mind Burnham’s global experience is negligible IMO.

[Viviane: 🌹Labour led by Keir for me @LaindonFEMINIST]

The reality is maybe 1 day Burnham could have been the PM. He’s not my cup of tea but I can see something there. But the truth is this is not the way to do it. It’s not the Labour way. That’s why few Members will now ever vote for him. His judgement is way off. Not a good trait

[Jennifer Stewart @JenniferJS_]

Texts to @harriet_symonds from Labour MPs angry with @AndyBurnham

MP: ‘There’s no way I’m going to Makerfield now, good luck to the whips!’

Labour source: ‘Andy Burnham ran for leader in 2010 and lost. He ran for leader in 2015 and lost. He has spent the last two years undermining this Labour government at every opportunity in pursuit of his goal of becoming Labour leader. To suggest he’s only running because of Wes is an insult to everyone with a modicum of intelligence.’

2nd MP: ‘That's saved me a hotel and petrol money. Thanks Andy’

3rd MP: ‘Andy Burnham failed in 2010. He failed in 2015. He ran away from Westminster when the going got tough. That’s not leadership.’

4th MP: ‘Not the only one. I was planning to go on Saturday. But I campaign for great candidates, our Party and to make our country better, not for people who are only in for it for themselves.’

5th MP: ‘I was prepared to support Burnham by making some canvassing calls from the other side of the country. Absolutely no way, now. Who the hell does he think he is?’

Yes, exactly. Who do you think you are, Andy Burnham?

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

The most extraordinary claim in John Rentoul’s article is not that Andy Burnham may one day challenge for the Labour leadership. It is the assertion that Sir Keir Starmer has effectively reconciled himself to defeat and is quietly preparing for the end of his premiership.

There is no evidence presented for such a conclusion beyond anonymous briefings, speculation and Westminster gossip. Indeed, it runs contrary to what many Labour members appear to believe.

The assumption underpinning the article is that support within parts of Westminster automatically translates into support across the wider Labour movement. That is a dangerous assumption to make. Labour leadership contests are not decided solely by MPs, journalists, advisers or political commentators. They are decided by the party itself.

Many grassroots members do not see Andy Burnham as the inevitable successor described by sections of the media. On the contrary, a growing number view the current manoeuvring as an attempt by elements of the left and far left to regain influence within a party that moved decisively away from that politics under Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.

The irony is difficult to miss. Those same political traditions failed to convince the electorate when they had the opportunity to do so. Sir Keir Starmer, by contrast, led Labour to a landslide general election victory and secured a parliamentary majority larger than all of the opposition parties combined. Whatever criticisms may be made of his government, that electoral achievement remains a matter of fact rather than opinion.

What many members appear to be asking is a simple question. Why would a party abandon a leader who won a historic election victory and a government that is implementing its manifesto commitments in favour of a project built largely upon speculation, personality and aspiration?

The article also reveals a familiar problem within sections of the political media. Westminster has a tendency to mistake its own conversations for political reality. Journalists speak to MPs. MPs speak to journalists. Advisers speak to both. Before long, a narrative develops and begins to feed upon itself until conjecture is presented as inevitability.
Yet outside Westminster there are hundreds of thousands of Labour supporters and members who may see matters very differently. Many are less interested in leadership intrigue than in whether the government is delivering the programme upon which it was elected.

If there is one lesson from recent political history, it is that Westminster is often the last place to understand what the wider public and party memberships are actually thinking.

Perhaps Andy Burnham will become Labour leader one day. Perhaps he will not. But presenting his succession as inevitable, while portraying Sir Keir Starmer as a Prime Minister resigned to defeat, says more about the assumptions of political commentators than it does about the reality of the Labour Party today.

[Anne @Anniepop2027]

Why should Labour voters support Andy Burnham when he is campaigning AGAINST Labour and Labour achievements in government?

Dishonesty, disloyalty are not Labour values.

I won’t.

@LBC @SkyNews @BBCNews

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

I think the electorate have simply had enough of sections of the media constantly attempting to destabilise the Government that was elected with a substantial mandate.

For months there have been leaks, briefings, anonymous sources, leadership speculation and manufactured outrage. Yet each new so called bombshell appears to generate less public interest than the last.

The reality is that most people are focused on their daily lives, not Westminster gossip. They care about living standards, public services, housing, jobs and whether the Government is delivering on its promises.

The endless attempts to keep this story alive appear increasingly disconnected from public opinion. What some journalists present as a political crisis, much of the electorate now seems to regard as little more than tired rhetoric and another attempt to manufacture instability where none exists.

The public have heard it all before. They are less interested in Westminster intrigue and far more interested in seeing the Government get on with the job it was elected to do.

[Anne @Anniepop2027]

One of the worst actions by @AndyBurnhamGM is his cynical undervaluation of @UKLabour's HUGE achievements in just 20 months, especially after 14 years of Tory failure. What he and Josh have attempted is unforgivable.

👇🏻@LBC @SkyNews

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

Hardly a disastrous two years, is it?

Despite the endless speculation, this Government was elected with a substantial mandate and still has more than three years remaining to deliver on that programme.

So far it has:

• Introduced measures to strengthen workers' rights.

• Taken steps to reform planning and accelerate house building.

• Increased investment in the NHS and reduced waiting lists in many areas.

• Established Great British Energy as a publicly owned energy company.

• Improved relations with European partners and begun rebuilding Britain's international standing.

• Advanced rail reform and the return of passenger services to public ownership as existing contracts expire.

• Increased the minimum wage and strengthened employment protections.

• Delivered further investment in clean energy and national infrastructure.

No government completes its manifesto within two years. The question is whether it is making progress towards the commitments on which it was elected. On that measure, there is clearly far more substance to discuss than Peter Mandelson's opinions or media fantasies about an early General Election.

There are still more than three years to go. That is an eternity in politics.

[Jennifer Stewart @JenniferJS_]

PM Keir Starmer's Labour govt is bringing investment back to local communities primarily through its £5.8 billion Pride in Place programme which empowers local residents to decide how to spend up to £20 million per area to regenerate high streets, build better sports facilities & improve local amenities.

The govt is also tackling the cost of living with targeted policies like average energy bill reductions, a freeze on rail fares & fuel duty & seasonal initiatives like VAT slashes on children's meals, theatre tickets and family attractions & free child bus travel in August.

Direct energy bill relief will come from the £15 billion Warm Homes Plan to lower long-term heating costs. National Living Wage to be raised, state pension increased via the triple lock & two-child benefit cap scrapped to lift thousands of children out of poverty. Free school meals extended; school breakfast clubs invested in.

So why is @AndyBurnhamGM trashing Labour? It's confusing, since he seems to have the same aims as @Keir_Starmer - who's already acting on it. In a big way. #starmermuststay

[Anne @Anniepop2027]

This is just a BLATANT coup by the LEFT who used Keir Starmer to get elected

Aided and abetted by a RW media who want the best PM out and an early GE

An utter betrayal to the country .. don’t fall for it voters

Stand by Starmer

@LBC @SkyNews

[Gordon Fielden @GordonFielden]

At the moment, it appears that around 52 per cent of Labour members continue to support Keir Starmer and are pushing back against what many see as the influence of self appointed kingmakers and the media circus that surrounds leadership speculation.

The reality is that Labour members will decide the future direction of their party, not commentators, not newspaper columnists, and not broadcasters. The more sections of the media attempt to manufacture a contest, the more members seem determined to make up their own minds.

[Jennifer Stewart @JenniferJS_]

I couldn't sleep last night, worrying about the damage @AndyBurnhamGM is doing to @UKLabour, talking it down as if it's worse than Reform. A lot of what he says he'll do is being done by this govt. but he can't acknowledge it because then he wouldn't have a platform to run on.

He's not running against @Keir_Starmer - he's running against the Labour Party, using its resources. He doesn't even use the Labour logo. Couldn't be bothered to think through his arguments or organise his own team. Hasn't really got a position on anything that he won't change if doing so will bring him more power. Mr. Authenticity personified.

He knows perfectly well the constraints @Keir_Starmer has been and still is under, & that he's the one who's done all the hard work & taken all the flak. As soon as it starts paying off so people can feel the effect, Burnham - who has exploited the 'anti-Keir' sentiment that he knows was largely generated by 2 years of media savagery - thinks he can just swan in, smash and grab - and with an ill-thought-through campaign. What an insult to Makerfield voters.

What an insult to us all. I'm not even sure that he believes his own spiel any more. The smallest bit of scrutiny and it falls apart. Because he's had to backtrack so much and effectively support govt. policies. That's the govt that he's trashing. The Labour govt that he's running against.

The worst thing is the position he puts us in - all the Labour members and MPs who support Keir Starmer & understand how vital it is for him to stay and retain stability while policies come to fruition. We don't want Reform to win. But we don't want Burnham anywhere near Number 10.

Effectively he's blackmailing us and the whole Labour Party: support me or Reform wins. He's casually causing real suffering. I'll never forgive him for it.