Labour Blocks Burnham as Party Rift Deepens Ahead of Polls

Published: 25 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

A fresh internal dispute has erupted inside Britain’s governing Labour Party after Andy Burnham, the popular mayor of Greater Manchester, was blocked from standing in an upcoming parliamentary by-election, a move that has intensified accusations of factionalism and heightened anxiety within party ranks ahead of a difficult electoral year.

The row centres on Burnham’s failed attempt to return to Westminster through a by-election expected to be held by the end of February in the Manchester seat of Gorton and Denton, a constituency long regarded as safely Labour. Burnham, who has served as mayor since 2017 and remains one of the most recognisable figures on Labour’s centre-left, formally requested permission from the party’s ruling body to contest the seat. His application, however, was rejected by Labour’s National Executive Committee, or NEC, prompting fierce debate over whether the decision was motivated by electoral pragmatism or internal power politics.

Under Labour rules, Burnham needed approval from the NEC because winning the seat would have required him to resign as mayor, triggering a separate mayoral by-election in Greater Manchester. Burnham’s current mayoral mandate runs until May 2028, meaning a return to Parliament would have cut short a term endorsed by millions of voters across the region. Party officials argue that this potential chain of elections would have placed a heavy strain on campaign resources at a time when Labour faces multiple electoral tests.

In a statement issued after Saturday’s meeting, Labour said the NEC had acted to prevent “an unnecessary election” for the Manchester mayoralty, adding that such a contest would have had “a substantial and disproportionate impact on party campaign resources.” According to the party, the decision reflected organisational realities rather than hostility toward Burnham as an individual.

That explanation has failed to convince many inside Labour, particularly those already uneasy about the party’s direction under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Critics argue that Burnham’s exclusion reflects a deeper nervousness within the leadership about allowing a high-profile figure, widely seen as a potential future leader, back into the House of Commons at a time when Starmer’s authority looks increasingly fragile.

Burnham’s political profile looms large in Labour’s modern history. A former Cabinet minister under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, he has twice run for the party leadership and lost, yet remains one of Labour’s most electorally successful figures in England. As mayor, he has cultivated an image as a champion of regional power and social justice, earning the nickname “King of the North,” a playful reference borrowed from the television series Game of Thrones. His outspoken style and willingness to challenge central government have made him popular among many grassroots members while also placing him at odds with Labour’s current leadership.

In his submission to the NEC, Burnham stressed that he would act as a “team player” if permitted to stand, insisting his motivation stemmed from a desire to strengthen Labour’s parliamentary presence rather than undermine the prime minister. Nonetheless, allies of Starmer remain sceptical. Burnham has openly questioned elements of Labour’s economic strategy and, last September, called for a broader debate about how the party should counter the rising influence of Reform U.K., the anti-immigration party that has siphoned support from both Labour and the Conservatives.

The timing of the dispute has added to its political significance. Labour is widely expected to face a punishing set of elections in May, often likened to U.S. midterms in their potential to damage governing parties. Opinion polls suggest Labour could lose power in Wales for the first time since the devolved legislature was established in 1999, fall well short of reclaiming government in Scotland, and suffer heavy losses in local councils across England. These grim projections have intensified scrutiny of Starmer’s leadership barely a year after Labour’s landslide general election victory in July 2024.

Since that triumph, Labour’s poll ratings have slid sharply. Analysts point to a series of policy missteps, including contentious decisions on public spending and industrial relations, many of which have been linked directly to Starmer’s cautious and highly centralised decision-making style. The beneficiaries of Labour’s decline have included Reform U.K. and the Green Party, both of which have capitalised on voter frustration with mainstream politics.

Against this backdrop, Starmer’s personal approval ratings have sunk to worrying levels. Senior party figures privately acknowledge that a disastrous showing in May could reopen questions about his long-term future, despite Labour’s commanding majority in Parliament. It is within this tense environment that Burnham’s attempted return to Westminster has been interpreted by some as a challenge to the existing leadership order.

Reactions to the NEC’s decision have been sharply divided. John Slinger, a Labour lawmaker aligned with the leadership, welcomed the outcome, saying the “quick and clear decision” would allow the party to “move on from the damaging introspection and psychodrama of the last week” and unite behind the eventual candidate for Gorton and Denton. In his view, prolonging the debate would only have deepened divisions and distracted from campaigning.

Others, however, were openly dismayed. Louise Haigh, a former Cabinet minister, described the ruling as “incredibly disappointing” and urged the NEC to “change course and make the right decision.” For critics like Haigh, blocking Burnham risks alienating members who admire his record in Greater Manchester and see him as a credible voice capable of reconnecting Labour with disillusioned voters in northern England.

The episode has also revived longstanding concerns about Labour’s internal democracy. Some activists argue that decisions of this magnitude should be subject to broader consultation rather than being settled by a small group within the NEC. The committee that rejected Burnham’s bid reportedly consisted of just ten members, a fact that has fuelled claims of excessive centralisation and gate-keeping at the top of the party.

For Burnham himself, the setback represents another twist in a career marked by both ambition and frustration. While he has yet to announce his next move, allies suggest he will continue focusing on his mayoral role, where he retains significant influence and a strong personal mandate. Yet the question of whether Labour can afford to sideline one of its most recognisable figures remains unresolved.

As Labour braces for a turbulent electoral season, the Burnham row underscores the delicate balance facing a governing party under pressure. Managing scarce resources, maintaining discipline, and avoiding internal rivalry may appear sensible priorities. At the same time, suppressing debate and blocking prominent voices risks reinforcing perceptions of a leadership disconnected from its base. With May’s elections looming, the consequences of that tension may soon become clear.