Burnham’s botched coup will only quicken Starmer’s exit – and awful though he is, this is why any successor would almost certainly be much worse: STEPHEN GLOVER

Millions of people in our unhappy country are suffering from a painful and persistent new disease. This is called Starmeritis.

The disease affects people from all walks of life. Tory, Reform, Liberal Democrat and even many Labor voters were affected. This can be revealed by meeting our leader Prime Minister for a short time. A few seconds of watching him give his latest lackluster performance is usually enough to set it off.

Common symptoms include nausea, headache, and existential anxiety. In severe cases, patients reported chronic depression and, in extreme cases, thoughts of ending it all. There is no known cure.

I must say that Andy Burnham, who has been called the ‘King of the North’ in recent days, has no known cure as he is presented as the savior who will save this country from a terrible trouble.

But yesterday Starmer and his allies defeated Burnham, at least for now. They blocked Labour’s early return to Westminster by eight votes to one in the National Executive Committee; here, as a reserve MP, he could undoubtedly incite a rebellion against the Prime Minister and present himself as an alternative leader.

Many victims of starmeritis will despair. They will now think that their illness will get worse and that there is no end to their pain.

Andy Burnham emerges from this unpleasant episode as a self-absorbed and selfish person who puts his own ambitions ahead of the interests of his party and the people he is supposed to represent.

As a victim of disease myself, I would naturally want to see the back of the worst prime minister of my life. What worries me is what might happen next.

All I can say is that I am pleased that Andy Burnham’s characteristically inept coup attempt has failed. Like other northern uprisings in English history – most notably the Rising of the North against Queen Elizabeth I in 1569 – Burnham’s half-baked campaign ended in failure.

Why would this clearly not charismatic or particularly talented politician, who twice unsuccessfully stood for the Labor leadership, think he was fit to be Prime Minister?

If Labour’s National Executive had allowed him to run in the Gorton and Denton constituencies, he would have been forced to resign as Mayor of Greater Manchester, to which he was re-elected less than two years ago. This would be followed by a mayoral election, which Reform UK would likely win.

Nor do I think the people of Manchester are overly pleased that the King of the North is willing to take a shot at them in order to wrest the seals of office from the trembling hands of Sir Keir Starmer.

Andy Burnham emerges from this unpleasant episode as a self-absorbed and selfish person who puts his own ambitions ahead of the interests of his party and the people he is supposed to represent.

He is also, politically speaking, almost the last person this country needs as a leader. Frankly, I’m not too blind to see Starmer’s worst failings. The list is long. He and Rachel Reeves raised taxes and weakened the economy.

In an increasingly dangerous world, the Prime Minister foolishly handed over the Chagos Islands (which we already had) to China-friendly Mauritius, essentially agreeing to hand over £35bn in exchange for the lease of the main island.

Starmer has talked big about defense and promised much more money, but Britain’s defense budget is barely growing while countries like Germany, Poland and even France are rearming. Reeves and Starmer, meanwhile, lied more than is usual even for politicians. They made a U-turn and perfected government.

But as bad as Starmer was, Burnham would be even worse. He believes that industries should be renationalised. It would definitely raise taxes even more. I haven’t heard him talk about more spending on defense or the urgent need to roll back Labor’s devastating Chagos Islands deal.

Knowledge of economics makes Rachel Reeves look like a coffin. Last September he claimed ‘we must move beyond the problem of the bond market being held hostage’; These words caused appropriate uneasiness in the bond markets, which were the only thing keeping Britain afloat.

As bad as Starmer was, Burnham would be even worse. He believes that industries should be renationalised. Will definitely raise taxes further, writes Stephen Glover

Will it be Wes Streeting, the ambitious and supposedly moderate Secretary of State for Health?

I doubt Sir Keir Starmer was thinking about any of this when he cast his vote as one of eight people who voted to block Burnham’s bid to become an MP. He was thinking about his own skin.

Presumably, if he were truly Machiavellian, he would allow the arrogant Burnham to remain with Gorton and Denton in the secret hope that he would be defeated by the Reformation. This would truly be the end of the King in the North’s political career.

No matter how bad the current leadership is, even those hardest hit by Starmeritis should be glad that an even more harmful political pathogen has been eradicated. Andy Burnham will sulk in his major offices, unable to contest any seat unless he resigns as mayor, which he almost certainly won’t do.

But who can doubt that this failed rebellion will inspire others to attempt a more considered coup against Starmer? What happened yesterday probably made it more likely that he would leave early and be replaced by someone worse.

The Labor Party will now resemble a sack of poppies as Starmerites and anti-Starmerists battle it out. The Prime Minister ignored calls from Labor leaders including Ed Miliband, Angela Rayner, London Mayor Sadiq Khan and deputy leader Lucy Powell to offer Andy Burnham every help to return to Westminster.

If these people voted for Starmer they wouldn’t want Burnham back. They knew the rationale was that he would serve as a lightning rod for those opposed to the current leadership.

With the King in the North out of the fight for the foreseeable future, someone else will need to be chosen to play Labor’s savior, someone who will miraculously revive the party’s fortunes. You and I know that such a person does not exist, but the rebels do not.

Will it be Wes Streeting, the ambitious and supposedly moderate Secretary of State for Health? I don’t know if there is enough support in a party that is increasingly leaning left. He will need to head in that direction to have any chance of success.

Angela Rayner is the scariest candidate because her political views are even to the left of Burnham’s and her credentials are weaker.

Ed Miliband, Net Zero obsessive and destroyer of North Sea oil and gas exploration, should not be overlooked either.

I don’t know who the successors will be. I just fear that they will be even worse than the Starmer regime, more willing to raise taxes, expand the role of the State and extinguish the last embers of enterprise.

So, against all odds, I want Starmer and the rest of the gang to survive until an election saves this country from our current nightmare. And that will only happen if the Conservatives and Reform put country before party and somehow unite to save us.

In the meantime, the road will be difficult. But one thing is clear.

Starmeritis is a very nasty disease, but there are a few others in the Labor laboratory that would be much, much worse.