In an article, on Best for Britain’s sub stack, Joshua Edwicker reviews the personnel responsible for EU relations in Burnham’s new cabinet. On first glance it would appear that this team is more likely to support closer relationships with the EU without putting roadblocks in the way and will at least have more ambition, although he doesn’t talk about Shabana Mahmood staying at the Home Office.
My fear is that relationships with the EU we’ll take a back seat in the priorities of the Burnham administration. New policy needs to start from the fact that the “Reset” has failed, yet most of the PLP don’t realise it. Not a single initiative announced in May 25 has been closed. It would be too easy for this team to continue to try for incremental changes to the trading rules with the EU.
The EU will survive without the UK and it is changing up, most significantly for the UK via its Industrial Accelerator Act (IAA).
People, mainly convinced Brexiters, have been saying the EU has changed too much, it hasn’t yet, but it will, The IAA is likely to increase the UK’s barriers to entry EU markets, harm the UK economy, and thus the living standards of the UK people.
We must put more on the table and act with speed. I believe that membership of the EEA, is a minimum first step and that the European Movement’s 5 asks are minimal demands. …
Is winning in Makerfield a new dawn for Labour, or just that this time, voters chose Labour as the “Not Farage” candidate. Since they won in Runcorn & Helsby, Reform have failed in Caerphilly, Gorton and Denton, and now Makerfield, losing to Plaid Cymru, the Greens and now to Labour. It was a great victory for Burnham and Labour, but the question has to be asked together with has Labour learnt the lesson that to fight Reform, you need to fight it. (I think not!)
Source: No10@flickr 10th June 2026 CC 2026 BY-ND-NC
Having returned to the House of Commons, Burnham has forced Keir Starmer to resign and a time table for a Party leadership election has been declared.
Much has been written about why he had to go; I have been calling for it since February when the likely defeats in Scotland and Wales became obvious. On the day, Labour also lost three more London Councils.
Starmer’s resignation speech starts in the same way as his election campaign to be leader of the Labour Party, with lies. When Starmer inherited the Labour Party, it was in the strongest financial position it had been for decades and anyone who has closely read the Forde report and the EHRC report knows there is still work to do to eliminate racism from the Labour Party. The focus on macroeconomic statistics repeats the mistakes that Biden made. While I do not subscribe to the meme that “perception is reality”, perhaps it is truer in politics than in engineering. Claiming the credit for growth doesn’t work if income equality remains at the current miserable level and if the growth in the economy goes into the pockets of a few. If people don’t feel better off, then it’s pointless claiming they should. It’s also difficult to understand, how Starmer can claim credit for the abolition of the two child benefit cap when he initially suspended seven MPs for voting for that abolition.
Much has been written about Starmer’s weaknesses as a politician and Prime Minister. For a lot more words you can check out Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian, who focuses on personality and the politics of Downing St., and fails to mention Gaza and the Middle East, and alternatively, Phil Burton Cartledge, who does mention them, together with the dishonesty of his mandate within the Party. Phil also repeats his accusation that Starmer and McSweeney deliberately sought to break up Corbyn’s electoral coalition.
Although some would seek to claim he’s been good on the world stage; this does need to be contrasted with his speeches and actions on Gaza, which is one of the primary causes for Labour’s loss of political support. Labour started the general election campaign with a poll score of 44%, finished with a vote of 34% which has since collapsed to a score in the high teens.
Source: politico.eu – British polls 24 June 2026
It is expected that Burnham will be crowned as Labour’s new leader. If so he will be beholden to the fixers and not the membership and his retreats from his beliefs in order to win Makerfield are worrying because Labour and the country need a change of direction not a change of personnel.
The new leader also needs to turn Labour’s democracy back on. It is clear from the ending of Blair’s New Labour government that this Government and Labour leadership have run out intellectual steam; the Party needs debate and new ideas to sustain its relevance and energy. We can also see by observing the last two years of the PLP what happens when MPs fear their whip more than their members and voters.
Clive Lewis, in an article entitled, ‘After Burnham’s Win in Makerfield, the Answer Cannot be Managerial Politics with a Different Accent’, speaks for me, when he says,
“Climate breakdown, war, energy insecurity, financial shocks, technological upheaval, and democratic decay are here. They will not wait for Labour to finish its management seminar.”
Rafael Behr writes a trenchant statement about the weakness of Labour's "Fix Brexit" policy. It's titled, "The Brexit delusion is dead – so now Keir Starmer doesn’t need to pretend any more" with a tag line, "To rebuild relations with Europe in a dangerous world, the prime minister needs to win big arguments, not hide behind outdated red lines".
He criticises the timidity of the manifesto, Starmer's apolitical approach to dealing with Europe, and everything really, points out that cherry-picking can never succeed and that membership is the best answer even for the economic questions.
Today's debate amongst Labour's leadership, is whether its possible to pursue a sector-by-sector negotiation without compromising the red lines. It is not! Unless the UK gets on the train, the next tranche of EU reforms will make it harder for an incrementalist approach to succeed. Furthermore the EU are not going to give better terms to an ex-member than to current or acceding states. Also the five year review is due to start, there is no reason why the EU will want to put more on the table, and Behr's eloquent statement, that the only model that truly works is membership is now obviously true, made more so by the changing geo-political circumstances. I would add, that until we begin to talk about the need for mutual social solidarity with the peoples of the European Union, again progress will be slow.
To me, this is a great article which you should read yourself, for those short of time, I have book marked the article in diigo, and made the following notes. These can be seen overleaf, by using the "Read More" button ...
The article uses the phrase swiss-style agreement which is highly unlikely to succeed and at the best is tone deaf as to the EU’s needs and wants.
UK in a changing Europe, document what they see as the timetable and goals of the current reset negotiations.I see them as optimistic, and everyone seems to forget that the EU’s starting point is full implementation of the withdrawal agreement and Windsor framework; there remain, even 18 months after the general election, eight infringement proceedings unresolved.
It’s sort of interesting that they think they need new language, but to me, they have not yet changed their mind.
I also see this as a means by which the Government deflects the internal Labour Party pressure towards joining the Customs Union by posing, parts of, the single market as an alternative. It is disappointing to see so many seeing the Customs Union as sufficient advance, but the UK economy and people need and want membership of both, including, reciprocal, free movement of people.
Labour should join the customs union and single market now and promise to rejoin the EU in its next election manifesto.
Various news sources, including the Brussels Times, report that EU is demanding a “poison pill” clause in further agreements, to make the cost of revoking the new treaties exorbitant. This should have been proposed by the UK side, and without it negotiations would stop.
I predict they won’t until they abandon the strategy of triangulating against reform and that will take significant personnel changes in the Government.
Are we moving closer to joining the EU? It's been quite an eventful month, culminating in Wes Streeting’s call for the UK to join the EU’s Customs Union. This article looks at the current state of thinking of HMG on negotiations with the EU, comments on the velocity and direction of travel, contrasting the red lines vs the numerous programme adoptions, recent polling evidence that a majority of people in the UK now want to rejoin, the House of Commons vote on rejoining the customs union, and the announcement of the UK’s rejoining Erasmus+, the EU’s student exchange scheme. It concludes looking at a Guardian EB piece questioning if British Politics is fit to survive the current challenges and the Labour Party’s abysmal response. The full article, is overleaf, use the "Read More" to see it ...
I was writing about something else, and wrote this on party management. It’s coherent, but doesn’t belong in what I am writing, and so I thought I’d share it now,
The paper was published in 2015 before the General Election. I read it in 2017 and strangely ended up sitting next to her at Conference ’19. I posted my comments in a blog, A note on Emanuelle Averil’s “the unintended consequences of New Labour” and in that article I selected some quotes. While being 20 years old, these comments seem equally relevant today, particularly about the Labour Party. I quote her on how suppressing the activist layer was mistaken and led to a failure to connect to the electorate, how factionalism suppresses plurality which made renewal impossible, how triangulation led to voter alienation and its control freakery led to a toxification of its image.
We might debate about the noughties, but it’s clearly true today. …
The Government have announced major regressive changes to the Asylum regime. These are all regressive, & vindictive. They must be opposed, and those MPs & Peers opposing these measures supported. This article looks at a couple of statements in opposition, and points at the Momentum model motion. While various press sources seem to have seen the proposals, I can't find the formal government statement. (10:57), see overleaf for more ...
The Labour Party staff stopped reporting membership to the NEC earlier this year, but they reported the end of year membership to Annual Conference and of course the electoral commission.
A number of years ago, I made a chart showing Labour’s membership from 1989 to 2021; I have just updated it using the end of 2024 figures.
There are stories published that Reform have overtaken Labour in terms of membership numbers; it would take an extraordinary amount of departures for this to be true. This article in the New Statesman published under a pseudonym as a gossip column is headlined as such and points at Labour List reporting the membership in Feb as 309,000. …
Labour is holding an election for the position of Deputy Leader, I have five questions I want to ask them. Use the "Read More" button to see what they were ...
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
