As we move into the next phase of the theatre which regrettably now constitutes British politics, there are some profound challenges ahead.
Three things strike me immediately. The first, and increasingly obvious, is that if Andy Burnham fails to win the Makerfield by-election, Nigel Farage and Reform UK will be rampant.
The second, consequent on the first, will be that any subsequent contest need not simply be about personalities, but a fundamental appraisal of the priorities of government, the direction of travel, and, above all, connectivity with those who have clearly become so “offside” with both major parties.
The third, which only arises if Keir Starmer is challenged and decides to fight the ensuing internal election, is how you do this whilst in government without creating the kind of chaos that existed when mass resignations made Boris Johnson’s position untenable.
Keir Starmer would be hard pressed to avoid chaos in government whilst fighting an internal election – Yui Mok/Reuters
The latter question requires a degree of sophistication and a genuine understanding that no one will forgive the Labour Party if a battle for leadership disrupts the Government to the point where contempt for politics in general damages our democracy. Difficult and even unthinkable as it may be, should such a contest take place, there would have to be agreement that none of the contestants would ask for, or accept, nomination or endorsement from serving ministers.
Only in this way can complete chaos be avoided, as it is a historic convention that anyone challenging the sitting prime minister, or backing an alternative candidate, must leave their post.
Whilst in 1975 Harold Wilson gave permission to members of the Cabinet to campaign on different sides in the referendum as to whether Britain should remain in the European Community, this was not a challenge to his leadership. It was a clever way of avoiding the disintegration of his government.
The current debate around the EU is most unhelpful to Labour. There is a clear economic case for greater alignment, but the politics remain toxic. Given that the political parties most favourable to Europe contest an incredibly crowded political niche, any focus on this is, for the moment, is suicidal.
Which is why focusing on the here and now in the June by-election is critical. It will become clear that if someone as popular as Andy Burnham – with his roots and family in the immediate area, and his clear understanding of, and connection to, the local people – cannot turn things round, then it’s highly unlikely that anyone else is going to do so. Vast swathes of the North and the Midlands would therefore be easy pickings for Nigel Farage.
This is not a moment for pandering to particular campaigns, political complexions or easy, trite and populist pronouncements.
Reform UK is expected to highlight Burnham’s ‘pro-EU agenda’ during its by-election campaign – Jack Taylor/Reuters
Reversing key long-term policies would be unthinkable. The great strides forward by social democracy in Scandinavia, for example, have been achieved through continuity, as well as the “common touch”, and staying in tune with those who would otherwise be easy fodder for opponents.
Anyone with any political antenna needs only to look across the Atlantic. There we have seen muddle-headedness about identity politics and a failure to listen to those who ought to be natural supporters. In the US, voters have been completely turned off by an elite consensus and what they see as an uncaring establishment – even when the Trumpian alternative happens to be embedded in, and from, those very elites.
What Andy Burnham can certainly talk about is delivery. Labour lost on May 7 because for millions the good intention that sometime, somewhere, something might happen to improve their lives is no longer enough. People have always wanted government to be “on their side”. They want this demonstrated by measures that improve their lot and give them hope of a better tomorrow. It means our leaders need to be decisive enough to make this happen.
I learnt a great deal as leader of the city of Sheffield for seven years in the 1980s, which stood me in incredibly good stead in coming into government in 1997. Whatever people’s disagreement with me politically, it would be hard for them to argue that I hadn’t delivered substantial change and been able to mobilise the Civil Service and civil society to help make that difference.
While Sheffield is the fourth-largest city in England, and is not as large as Greater Manchester, it faces the same challenges, and the same lessons can be learnt.
It is clear to me that in our febrile political maelstrom, the re-emergence of two strong political parties to the Left and Right of the centre of politics is crucial to our democratic dialogue, to building cohesion and to seeing off those populists who would fracture and divide, rather than unite the nation.
From the massive issues of how we help people to navigate the acceleration of the use of artificial intelligence and robotics, through to investing heavily in the renewal of many run-down communities, we need a government which is alongside – and felt to be intuitively connected with – the voters.
Leading up to May 7, there were some dangerous signs that should lead us to reflect on the history of Europe in the 20th century. We need to be far more alert and aware of the dangers that confront us when grievances are stirred, bitterness and even hatred fostered, and false promises lead us into unknown territory.
That is the seriousness of the moment.
Lord Blunkett served as education secretary and home secretary in the Blair government