During Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday afternoon, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch asked of her opposite number: “How much longer do we have to put up with his shambles?” The answer, I’m afraid, is longer than she might hope.

Peter Mandelson was sacked as the British ambassador to Washington last September, and the scandal has barely subsided since. Yet despite the hyped-up appearances of Philip Barton and Morgan McSweeney before the Foreign Affairs Select Committee earlier this week, plus the Commons vote on referring the PM to the Privileges Committee, Starmer remains in place. While he isn’t thriving under the constant barrage, he is surviving. His stubborn grip on power is a growing source of frustration and embarrassment to the forces ranged against him, especially those in his own party.

Perhaps Starmer’s colleagues are holding back until after the Scottish, Welsh and local elections next week. After all, why push him out now when he can be made a scapegoat later? That sounds plausible, but there’s a major obstacle to removing him at any point in the near future: the lack of a suitable replacement.

The latest YouGov polling enumerates the problem. When voters were asked whether various Labour politicians would do a better or worse job than Starmer as prime minister, the only potential replacement to receive a net positive rating was Andy Burnham. The other names — Angela Rayner, Ed Miliband, Wes Streeting, Yvette Cooper, Shabana Mahmood and David Lammy — all got the thumbs down, even among 2024 Labour voters. The Rayner and Miliband results were especially humiliating, because they had the lowest levels of “don’t know”s. That is to say: the public knows full well who they are, but still don’t want either in No. 10.

In our solar system, the planet Jupiter exerts such a strong gravitational pull that it clears space of dangerous objects, thus helping to protect the Earth. In the Labour universe, Burnham serves much the same function — protecting Starmer by preventing any serving MP from emerging as an alternative to the politically unviable trio of Rayner, Miliband and Streeting. At the same time, because he’s busy being Mayor of Greater Manchester, Burnham is too far from Westminster to pose a genuine threat of his own.

A by-election could change that but, as happened with the seat of Gorton and Denton earlier this year, Starmer’s allies on Labour’s National Executive Committee have the power to block such a move. In any case, the by-election would have to be triggered and held between the return of Parliament after the local elections and the summer recess just two months later.

The Prime Minister, therefore, may have some time to play with, and he certainly has options. Two years into a parliament is an appropriate point at which to refresh a Government front bench. Starmer could promote rising stars such as Al Carns, Chris Curtis and Miatta Fahnbulleh while dumping at least some of his troublesome rivals. Streeting, not being part of the dominant soft-Left faction, is especially vulnerable. Suddenly, with new faces around the Cabinet table, Labour MPs can start thinking about a change of leadership in the medium term — 2027 or 2028, say — thus further extending Starmer’s lease on Downing Street.

Of course, the prospect of the PM eking out his time in office is a miserable one. But he has got away with it so far, and will continue to do so for as long as his colleagues let him.

---

Peter Franklin is Associate Editor of UnHerd. He was previously a policy advisor and speechwriter on environmental and social issues.

peterfranklin_

---