Columnists Peter Hitchens and Sarah Vine have voiced sharp criticism regarding the public praise afforded to former Prime Minister Keir Starmer by Labour MPs upon his exit from Downing Street. Appearing on the "Alas Vine & Hitchens" podcast, the commentators suggested the effusive tributes bordered on hypocrisy, given Starmer's recent political challenges. Hitchens remarked that the outpouring of laudatory comments might lead one to believe Starmer was removed for being excessively popular.
Both commentators highlighted instances of MPs offering glowing remarks about Starmer's "integrity," "determination," and "legacy," despite previous calls for his resignation. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar, who had previously urged Starmer to step down over the "Mandelson scandal," was noted for speaking of the ex-Prime Minister's positive attributes. Similarly, newly appointed Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh, an ally of Andy Burnham who had previously expressed a loss of confidence in Starmer, praised him for "bringing Labour back into Government." Hitchens described the situation as "strange," humorously suggesting that Starmer was ousted for being "wonderful" and universally loved.
The process by which Andy Burnham assumed the Prime Ministership also drew skepticism. Hitchens likened the procedure to becoming leader of North Korea, emphasizing its perceived obscurity. Sarah Vine questioned the legitimacy of Burnham's leadership, given that he secured the position through a by-election in his Makerfield constituency. She suggested that his leadership was "disingenuous," relying on the votes of approximately 17,000 constituents to gain the Labour Party leadership.
Vine further speculated that Starmer's tenure might have been a planned strategy to pave the way for Burnham, referring to it as a potential "Trojan horse" maneuver. She posited that Starmer's role was to "prepare the ground" for Burnham's arrival, citing the lack of a clear, immediate reason for Starmer's departure beyond "mistakes" and the "Peter Mandelson affair."
The podcast also addressed Burnham's stated ambition to reverse the effects of Margaret Thatcher's policies, particularly regarding privatization and the centralization of power. Burnham expressed a desire for an economy that "works for all people and places," suggesting a return to a more collectivist approach. However, Vine dismissed these aspirations as a "rhetorical fantasy," labeling the new Prime Minister as "naive." Hitchens, while acknowledging the impracticality of Burnham's vision, expressed some understanding for the sentiment, linking it to a desire for a pre-Thatcher era characterized by full employment and before deindustrialization. He also noted his own conservative perspective, stating he views the Thatcher era with "dismay."