Accustomed as they have become to getting a say on who leads the Tory Party Conservative members quite obviously have no vote on who might lead Labour.
But they most certainly have a view.
Now before we go further I should say two things. We did ask if Kemi Badenoch should remain leader of the Conservatives after the results which, whilst they had some sparks of optimism, were still not good.
The answer was so big it hardly warrants a graphic – 93 per cent said she should stay.
3.5% said she should go and 3.5% wanted her to stay for now but go before an election.
The second an perhaps more curious point is that this Survey was held over from April to be put into the field over the weekend following the local elections.
It closed completely just as Keir Starmer was due to make his make-or-break speech to try and stave off the absolute meltdown this week has since become for him.
When it closed: Andy Burnham had not so much set foot on a train to London and Wes Streeting was waiting to see – I doubt with much expectation – if Monday’s Starmer pulpit drone would have the effect Kemi Badenoch’s evisceration of Labour in the Commons on Wednesday had on her backbenchers.
It did not. Quite the opposite
But our responders didn’t know that for a fact when they voted on who they expected to lead Labour into the next election;
They already thought it would be Andy Burnham.
Burnham was out in front on just over thirty per cent, Starmer second but ten per cent behind. Streeting, who resigned yesterday but didn’t launch an official challenge (those his actions undoubtedly mean there will be one) managed less than half Burnham’s total.
Again none of those who responded knew Josh Simons MP, ironically once head of the Starmer backing ‘Labour Together’, would further fragment the wider Labour movement after Streeting’s resignation by resigning his Makerfield seat so Burnham could stand in the coming by-election, an intention Burnham has now confirmed.
Now it’s true ConservativeHome was less interested in who Tory members thought would lead Labour into the next election than we were from a purely political advantage standpoint in who they’d prefer to lead Labour into the next election. A resounding win for the current Prime Minister – for all the wrong reasons.
There are many wise strategists who know that ‘Commons performance’ alone does not make a leader, nor a winner, and they are correct. Kemi Badenoch is a wise enough woman to know that – but it helps. And since, as CCHQ themselves felt bold enough to tweet after her blistering Kings speech response, ‘This is Kemi Badenoch’s chamber, you’re just sitting in it’ it’s perhaps a reflection of her relentless questioning of Keir Starmer and pursuit of his failings that Tory members would prefer him to stay.
There are some of that group however who will undoubtedly have felt that for all his faults Keir Starmer may not be as bad for the country as some of his rivals for the job.
It’s worth just noting though the comparison of expectation for Burnham to lead 30.97% with the preference for him to lead 3.85%.
In all the smoke and mirrors and speculation – some of it wild nonsense to fill the airwaves and ‘socials’ – there isn’t an Elephant in the Room, there’s a herd.
No candidate including the incumbent will reduce welfare spending, and the others will probably argue to borrow more.
If Starmer and his supporters’ argument was that he provided stability in the country and the markets, then why has this all occurred in the first place? Because people including voters in last week’s elections and a third of his own backbenchers have decided he doesn’t and he can’t.
If Starmer had no plan, there’s precious little sign of what plan or vision his rivals have. Badenoch’s team brought an alternative to the oddly back seat product that was the actual King’s speech.
Starmer, who at some point, probably soon, will be leaving Downing Street, had one rather well delivered line about the election results aimed straight at Badenoch:
“We both have in common that we suffered disappointing election results. The difference between us is she has noticed”
She has, and she’s very wise not to ignore that. The bouquets for Wednesday’s speech, the alternative Kings Speech policy programme, and not being afraid to lay out the reason why successive PMs have failed – and will do so again – unless they accept that the entire system of government is constraining them.
She says she has a plan, and I truly believe she does, but she knows it has to include rehabilitating the Tory brand, not just her own, and not just in London but across the country.
Otherwise she’ll be taking a bow, but not a crown, however much she’s unafraid of the member for Clacton – who wasn’t even there.
