Who the hell does Andy Burnham think he is…

… that’s the question Westminster insiders are asking. And as he ponders whether to run in a by-election and then launch his Downing Street challenge, the Greater Manchester mayor has so far failed to demonstrate he’s anything more than a friendly face with a different accent, says John Rentoul

For too many in the Labour Party, the mirage of the Manchester mayor is a comforting fantasy. The departure of former Labour minister Andrew Gwynne – who had the whip removed over offensive WhatsApp messages – creates a route for Andy Burnham to make a Commons comeback that would allow him to challenge Keir Starmer’s position.

Yet there are many problems with the idea of Burnham sweeping down from his northern fastness to save a grateful nation from the clutches of the hated Starmer – not least that he has to be selected as the candidate, elected to parliament, nominated as a challenger and then victorious in the leadership contest. He could fall at any of those hurdles.

Then there is a fifth reason for doubting that Burnham is the answer to either the Labour Party’s or the country’s problems. What alternative programme does he offer beyond a different accent and a friendly face?

Speaking to sources in Westminster last night, there was a lot of “Who the hell does he think he is?”. Sam Rushworth, the loyalist Labour MP for Bishop Auckland, told me: “This week’s events highlight both the volatility of the world and Keir Starmer’s demonstrable skills as a statesman. Surely, it would be mad to change prime minister when we need steadiness and stability in the national interest.”

Even if Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) allowed Burnham to stand as the candidate in the by-election in Gorton and Denton, vacated by Gwynne, that would only be one of five hurdles cleared.

The NEC, on which supporters of the prime minister have a majority, could refuse to endorse him for any or all of a number of reasons. It could insist that he keep his promise to serve a full term as mayor, running until 2028. It could say that the party cannot afford a by-election for the mayoralty of Greater Manchester – either financially or politically: there is a chance that a Reform candidate could win.

Or it could say that the candidate must be a woman, given that male Labour MPs currently outnumber females.

There might be an outcry against such an obvious stitch-up, and it might extend even beyond the Fire Brigades Union, which only re-affiliated to the Labour Party in 2015 because Jeremy Corbyn was leader. But Starmer’s fixers on the NEC are capable of withstanding an open letter to The Guardian.

But suppose that Burnham did become the candidate. He would then have to win a by-election at a time when no seat in England is safe from Nigel Farage’s advancing army. The bookmakers already give Reform a 40 per cent chance of winning the by-election, before we know who the candidates will be, and 30 per cent of the electorate is Muslim, which means the Green Party, Workers Party or a pro-Palestinian independent could split the Labour vote.

Of course, it would be an unusual by-election because even voting for the Labour candidate would be a protest against the government, given that Burnham would be trying to get into parliament to challenge the prime minister. “Vote Labour, Get Keir Out.” I do not see how that would work.

Then let us suppose that Burnham becomes an MP again. Most of his colleagues will resent a grandee swanning in to Westminster, claiming to lead them. It may be that 81 of them are so desperate to dislodge the prime minister that in the absence of a challenge from Angela Rayner or Wes Streeting they rally behind the king of the north instead. But it is not obvious that he would secure the nominations he needs to launch a leadership contest.

Finally, we have to assume that, if there were a leadership election, he would win it. His record of leadership elections – fought two, lost two – does not suggest that this is a given. He is the most popular candidate among party members by far, but this could reflect two claims that may not survive the rigours of a leadership campaign.

One is that he is a successful and popular mayor of a great city. That does not guarantee that he will be a successful and popular prime minister. The other is that party members project all sorts of wishful qualities onto him because he is unavailable. As soon as they have to consider a candidate prime minister rather than a semi-mythical being, their judgement may be different.

This is related to the fifth and most serious obstacle to Burnham replacing Starmer: what programme does he offer the country that would rescue this Labour government from its pit of despair?

His advocacy of proportional representation, citizens’ assemblies and abolishing party whips seems – how can we put this? – beside the point. His big idea appears to be somehow throwing off the constraints of fiscal orthodoxy to allow a slightly more “left-wing” policy of tax and spend.

In a speech to the Institute for Fiscal Studies this week, Burnham provocatively repeated his phrase about the country being “in hock to the bond markets”. His defenders argue that he was merely describing the effect of “our shallow, adversarial political system”, but this is playing with words.

He is implying that Rachel Reeves is too cautious, and that he would refuse to be dictated to by the markets. This is dangerous talk, with more than a touch of Liz Truss about it.

It is not what the Labour Party or the country needs, at precisely the time when Starmer has shown leadership on the international stage. The prime minister was firm without being antagonistic towards Donald Trump as the US president marched to the top of the Greenland hill and then back down again.

The would-be pretenders Rayner, Streeting and Shabana Mahmood recognise that now is not the time to undermine the government from within. Even Lucy Powell, Labour’s deputy leader, urges unity and loyalty. Burnham should heed her advice.