MARK LITTLEWOOD
Political Betting is a new weekly column by Mark Littlewood aimed at people who like gambling on politics.
All reasonable signs point to the Starmer premiership coming to an end in relatively short order. This isn’t a matter of Westminster-watchers and psephologists interpreting complex and intricate signals. The signs are in gigantic neon lights beaming the message that the PM is finished – anyone with eyes can see it.
And yet here he still is. Sitting it out. Riding it out. Refusing to budge.
What, then, finally makes the teetering Jenga tower collapse? Which block needs to be removed to allow the laws of political gravity to do their work?
The median position of most commentators for months now has been that the May 7th elections will be so apocalyptic for Labour as to make action unavoidable. It is worth sketching out the anticipated scale of the tsunami likely to hit Labour at the polls next week – it is not going merely to be bad. It will be truly devastating.
Labour will slip to third place in the Welsh Senedd elections, a contest it has dominated for a century. The party may even end up behind Reform in Scotland.
Across England, it stands to lose more than two thirds – and possibly as many as three quarters – of all the seats it’s defending. To put that in historical context, losing around 50% of incumbent councillors has typically been considered an absolute bloodbath.
The dwindling platoon of Starmer loyalists will try to cling to a statistic showing them still controlling around 20 of the councils holding elections – but this will only be because these areas elect in thirds and the current Labour majority may be impregnable even to a total wipeout in this year’s electoral cycle.
Mapping Thursday’s results onto a future General Election will show Labour not merely heading for defeat but possibly returning fewer than 100 MPs to the House of Commons. The word ‘existential’ is ludicrously overused in contemporary political discourse, but in this instance it will be wholly appropriate. Labour’s continued existence as a major political party will hang by a thread.
It would make smart political sense to blame the catastrophe on the scandal-ridden Starmer who, polls show, is about as popular with the electorate as herpes.
So far, so straightforward.
The tricky bit is what happens next.
No one wants to be the next Anas Sarwar. Back in February, the beleaguered Scottish Labour Leader thought he had read the room over the Mandelson affair. He leapt over the barricades and demanded the Prime Minister‘s resignation. Within minutes he realised he was alone in no man’s land, his colleagues still bunkered down in the trenches.
When the herd moves, it moves – but being the one person who starts the stampede requires luck, judgement and a following wind, or it can go horribly wrong.
The first thing to look for as the election results come in is whether the public pronouncements of Andy Burnham, Angela Rayner, Ed Miliband and Wes Streeting look co-ordinated – or at least strike the same rebellious note. If so, a move against Starmer is imminent and he may be forced to resign within days.
Unless an uncharacteristic bout of self-reflection leads Starmer to fall on his sword, we will probably need two of three factors to come into play to bring about his removal from No. 10.
The first is that it becomes abundantly clear there are at least 80 Labour MPs willing to force a vote of no confidence in the PM and that he would be almost certain to lose it.
The second is that sufficient members of his Cabinet make plain that he should quit and that they will refuse to continue serving under him.
The third – which might of itself be sufficient but is not obviously open to political influence – is that his wife, Victoria, tells him it is time to go.
Barring desperate appeals to the PM’s spouse, those in Labour’s ranks determined to see Starmer ousted need to ensure that the first two factors come together in the week beginning May 11th. If they fail to do so, this zombie Prime Minister could stagger on indefinitely. The window to remove him is wide open – but it will probably slam shut by the end of May.
Starmer loyalists will hope that a quirk in the political timetable might create problems for the plotters. Between now and July 16th, there are only 36 scheduled Parliamentary sitting days. This, they will hope, limits the time and space available for mischief to be whipped up in the corridors of Westminster.
On the flip side, it means that being landed with a lame-duck Prime Minister for the two or so months it would take to run a full leadership campaign is less of an issue. Those who like gossip revel in the intrigue of plans being hatched in London SW1; more serious plotters, however, tend to prefer the discretion of making plans away from the Westminster spotlight.
The bookies’ odds – a two in three chance that Starmer is removed this year – represent reasonably good value. Even so, the rebels face three obstacles.
The first is the absence of any obvious successor. The only candidate with reasonable public approval ratings, Burnham, would need to find a Parliamentary seat. There was some evidence he might have prevailed in the Gorton and Denton by-election had he been allowed to stand, but the idea of anything describable as a ‘safe Labour seat’ following the May 7th elections seems fanciful – as does his likelihood of securing clearance from Labour’s ruling NEC. One also needs to consider how a by-election with Burnham as candidate could play out: the message would presumably be: ‘Vote Labour to get rid of our Labour Prime Minister.’ It might just work, but it is deeply unorthodox.
The second obstacle – and a further mark against Burnham – is the shortage of time. If Starmer makes it through to party conference, he has every chance of surviving until 2029. This is why I consider the odds of 4/1 that he is ousted in 2027, or 14/1 in 2028, to be poor value. If the Mandelson fiasco and a set of election results amounting to the worst in living memory are insufficient to merit a coup, what sort of event will prompt the pulling of the trigger in the autumn or beyond?
The third is Labour’s astonishing historical track record of failing to remove useless leaders. It couldn’t get rid of Jeremy Corbyn despite barely 20% of the Parliamentary Labour Party being willing to work with him. It failed to prevent Michael Foot leading it to electoral disaster in 1983. The efforts to rid itself of Gordon Brown before the 2010 election were a fiasco.
All of this means that we could have the mother and father of all messes on our hands from the middle of May: different factions firing the starting pistol at different times – an uncoordinated pile-on rather than a surgical strike.
In such circumstances, a long-odds bet might be an attractive option. Given the flaws of the current front-runners, the party may begrudgingly settle on a unity candidate on some sort of ‘stability’ ticket – a Pat McFadden or a Hilary Benn, for example. That is not the most likely outcome, but the odds on some of the rank outsiders are attractive.
I expect Starmer to be out by the end of the summer. If he survives beyond that, he will probably make it to the next election. The list of those who could follow him is, in truth, a long one – and those currently some way down it are worthy of serious study.
Mark Littlewood is a former director of the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Director of PopCon.
This article (Political Betting: When Will Starmer Go?) was created and published by The Daily Sceptic and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Mark Littlewood
See Related Article Below
Angela Rayner’s allies say Starmer has ‘got to go’: Friends insist Mandy’s friendship with Epstein made Labour look like ‘paedo protectors’ party’
Allies of Angela Rayner have warned that Keir Starmer ‘has got to go’ over the Peter Mandelson vetting scandal.
In a move that casts doubt on reports of an imminent Cabinet return for the former deputy PM, friends have briefed Labour MPs they expect the Prime Minister to be ousted soon after next week’s local elections.
One of Ms Rayner’s supporters warned that Labour was becoming known as the ‘paedo protectors’ party’ under Sir Keir’s leadership, referencing Mandelson’s friendship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The long-standing ally said the scandal was causing lasting damage among Labour’s traditional working-class supporters after it was revealed that Sir Keir turned a blind eye to the disgraced peer’s friendship with Epstein when appointing him as US ambassador.
The source said the situation has been compounded by the PM’s decision to hand a peerage to his former communications chief, Matthew Doyle. He had the Labour whip suspended for campaigning for a councillor who had been charged with child sex offences.
‘Keir Starmer is now the leader of the paedo protectors’ party, and he has to go,’ the source said.
‘The friendship between Matthew Doyle and Mandelson is a major problem. There are further revelations to come there.’
It has emerged that Sir Keir floated the idea of a Cabinet return for Ms Rayner in a bid to shore up his faltering leadership. Labour sources confirmed the pair held private talks earlier this month but insisted that no formal job offer had been made or accepted.
A spokesman for Ms Rayner distanced her from the friend’s remarks about the PM’s future, saying: ‘This doesn’t represent Angela’s views.’
Ms Rayner backed the release of the Mandelson files, but fell into line this week by helping vote down a Commons inquiry into whether the PM lied about the disastrous appointment.
The Mail on Sunday revealed at the weekend that Ms Rayner has been phoning senior members of the parliamentary Labour party to urge them ‘it’s now or never’ if they wish to remove the PM.
Sir Keir is weighing up the idea of a snap reshuffle in the immediate aftermath of the May 7 elections to try to stamp his authority on the party.
Aides have discussed the plan as an opportunity to shift the Government to the Left in response to elections which are expected to see Labour lose votes to the Greens, particularly in London and the inner cities.
Blairite Business Secretary Peter Kyle and Technology Secretary Liz Kendall are both being lined up for the chop, clearing space for more Left-wing figures such as Ms Rayner and the party’s deputy leader Lucy Powell.
Sir Keir yesterday fuelled speculation that Rachel Reeves could also be sacked.
During questions in the Commons, he refused to guarantee that the Chancellor would keep her job. The PM defended her record but ducked direct questions about whether she would stay on.
The Daily Mail: continue reading
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply