Top Tweets for #RIPLABOURPARTY

🔍 THE DAILY DEEP DIVE — 26 JUNE 2026 WHO REALLY REMOVED KEIR STARMER? WAS IT A COUP ? There was no formal vote to remove him. No Labour membership ballot. No defeat in Parliament. Labour’s NEC, senior ministers, nervous MPs and a media machine that turned pressure into inevitability. And at the centre sits one important figure: Shabana Mahmood. Mahmood was both Home Secretary and Chair of Labour’s National Executive Committee. In one room, she served in Starmer’s Cabinet. In the other, she chaired the body controlling Labour’s internal machinery, candidate approvals and Andy Burnham’s route back to Parliament. Then, during the crisis, Mahmood reportedly helped tell Starmer that he should consider setting out a timetable for leaving. That does not prove she organised his downfall. The NEC chair cannot dictate collective decisions. But the overlap deserves scrutiny. The politician helping persuade Starmer that his time was ending also chaired the institution controlling Burnham’s return to Westminster. THE NEC OPENED THE GATE In January, NEC officers rejected Burnham’s attempt to stand in Gorton and Denton. The reasons were clear. He had been elected Greater Manchester mayor. Four months later, when Makerfield became vacant, NEC officers changed course. Why ? Reports suggested support had been agreed before Burnham formally applied. What had changed was the mood inside Labour. MPs were frightened. Reform was advancing. Starmer’s authority was weakening. Burnham looked like the man who might save their seats. The NEC did not sack Starmer. But it opened the gate through which his most dangerous rival returned. Without that decision, Burnham could not have become an MP. Without becoming an MP, he could not have challenged for the Labour leadership. That was not a routine administrative decision. THE PLP APPLIED THE PRESSURE Burnham then won Makerfield convincingly. It became a verdict on Starmer. Reports suggested Burnham could command the support of around 200 Labour MPs. Ministers who had served under Starmer began treating his departure as inevitable. They did not necessarily need to launch a formal challenge. They only needed to convince him that he would lose one. When your Cabinet and MPs begin speaking about your leadership in the past tense, written rules mean very little. Starmer eventually said he had heard the answer from his parliamentary party. That tells us who delivered the final blow. Not Labour members. The Parliamentary Labour Party. THE MEDIA CREATED INEVITABILITY The media did not invent every problem facing Starmer. His government made mistakes. Promises were broken. Communication was poor. Many voters felt change was arriving too slowly. The media became part of the machinery. Almost every setback was forced through the same frame: Can Starmer survive? When will Burnham return? How many MPs are plotting? The headlines frightened more MPs. After Burnham won Makerfield, much of the coverage stopped asking whether Starmer would survive. It began discussing Burnham’s government. Who would become chancellor? Who would remain in Cabinet? When would he enter Downing Street? All before Labour members had voted. The media did not pull the trigger. But it repeatedly announced that the gun had already gone off. WAS IT A COUP? Not in the traditional sense. There is no public evidence that the NEC formally agreed to overthrow Starmer. There is no proof of one command centre directing MPs, ministers and journalists. But political removals do not always require one conspiracy. The NEC opened the gate. The PLP applied the pressure. Senior ministers removed Starmer’s remaining protection. Shabana Mahmood’s overlapping roles do not prove she designed the operation. But they expose how concentrated Labour’s internal power had become. She served in the government of the man under pressure. She chaired the institution controlling the route of the man expected to replace him. That deserves scrutiny. Keir Starmer was not removed by the electorate. He was not defeated in Parliament. He was not rejected by Labour members. He was persuaded that the institutions around him had already reached their verdict. That would not be party democracy.

Andy Burnham viene eletto deputato giovedì scorso. Durante il week depone il primo ministro, non senza chiedergli un passaggio di consegne di tre mesi perché non sa da che parte cominciare Quando Starmer si dimette subito, Burnham ne approfitta per un serie di selfie, qualche video si TikTok e per dire tutto e il contrario di tutto: aumentare la spesa militare sì ma meglio che no; limitare l’immigrazione sì, ma meglio non troppo; vicino all’Europa sì ma fatemici pensare. Non sa se l’economia sarà affidata al socialismo di Milliband o al neoliberismo di Streeting. Parla di voler spostare Westminster a Manchester (no, non è uno scherzo). Annuncia che non viaggerà tanto come Starmer perché il lavoro è a casa, ovviamente nel mezzo della guerra in Ucraina, il riarmo europeo, la crisi in Medio Oriente, la crisi energetica. È già stato definito la versione di sinistra di Bojo, il monarca folle che trasformò Westminster in un circo di giullari e saltimbanchi. Tempi cupi.