What does Starmer stand to gain from proposed changes to the way Labour elects its leader?

Starmer’s push to scrap ‘one member, one vote’ for Labour leadership elections and return power to MPs has raised a few eyebrows. Sean O’Grady considers what the incumbent has to gain

Starmer speaking at the TUC Congress earlier this month (PA)

Given that Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner were elected leader and deputy leader of the Labour Party, respectively, only last year it seems odd that Starmer should want to reopen the question of the method of electing party leaders right now. To the casual observer, facing rising inflation, shortages, tax hikes, a winter Covid spike and a potential lockdown, it must look very much as though the Labour Party has got its priorities mixed up.

Ironically, and unusually for him, illogically, Starmer claims that the present arrangements, which haven’t been controversial for some time, are a pressing problem and prevent Labour from connecting with the voters: “Our rules as they are right now, focus us inwards to spend too much time talking to and about ourselves and they weaken the link with our unions.”

Perhaps Starmer judges that this early part of his leadership is the moment to exert his authority and strengthen the democratic base of the party (and shift it away from the left and towards the centre) on a permanent basis. More pertinently and immediately relevant than the eye-catching changes to leadership elections are reforms to the deselection of sitting Labour MPs, and reducing the role of conference in forming policy and the manifesto, again shifting it closer to public opinion. But it’s the leadership changes that will cause the fiercest arguments.