It all sounded feasible but improbable. A few days after Labour’s disastrous performance in local and devolved elections in May, one of Andy Burnham’s allies confidently forecast for me the sequence of events that would convey the then mayor of Greater Manchester to No 10. A friendly MP would surrender a parliamentary seat. Keir Starmer would be persuaded to resign. Other leadership contenders would see the futility of resistance to the Burnham bandwagon. It would roll, unchallenged, up Downing Street. It was a plan with many moving parts, and a lot that could go wrong.

That it all worked as predicted took more than luck. The Makerfield byelection was winnable for Labour only with the right candidate and a strong campaign. The scale of Burnham’s victory generated momentum sufficient to push other obstacles aside. The “Andy” brand was stronger than his party’s logo.

Crucially for Labour MPs, Burnham was the author of his own success. Few said that of Starmer. He was the frontman for his 2024 general election triumph, not its mastermind. He didn’t like campaigning, wasn’t comfortable with it and outsourced the messy business of political organisation to others. He thought the size of his majority afforded him space to govern without having to keep explaining himself to the public or cluttering his schedule with party management. But he also seemed unsure of what he wanted to achieve with all that power.

The contrast with Burnham is clear. Labour MPs find it reassuring to be led by a man who knows how to plan and who actually likes politics. The new prime minister is a vocal disparager of Westminster and its dysfunctional ways, but he isn’t a stranger to party machination. Unlike his predecessor, he doesn’t abhor discussion of ideas. Starmer, as one of his more loyal........

© The Guardian