Why Keir Starmer has an advantage over Boris Johnson

In the end it wasn’t even close. Keir Starmer won the Labour leadership election with 56.2 per cent of the vote in the first round. His closest rival, Rebecca Long-Bailey, secured less than half as many votes, and Lisa Nandy came third with just over 16 per cent. This was not a wafer-thin victory over his Corbynite opponent. It was a resounding mandate to lead.

The numbers really do matter. Starmer was only a few percentage points away from Jeremy Corbyn’s 59.5 per cent share in the 2015 leadership election, and polled almost 25,000 more votes. It was perhaps predictable that 79 per cent of new registered supporters endorsed him, but 56 per cent of paid-up members did as well—the same group which so enthusiastically supported Corbyn. In contrast, Long-Bailey—Corbyn’s preferred successor—won fewer affiliated members than Nandy, and polled 60,000 fewer votes than Owen Smith did in 2016. (Although to be fair there were only two candidates in that race.) The same trend was seen with Richard Burgon in the deputy leadership contest. Endorsed by prominent Corbynites such as John McDonnell, he only achieved 21.3 per cent of the vote—behind Rosena Allin-Khan and the winner (with 52.6 per cent) Angela Rayner, a unifying figure who drew support from across the party.

At the start of this race the consensus predicted exactly the opposite result. One former member of the shadow cabinet told me that Labour was entirely in the control of the hard left, and nobody from outside Corbyn’s inner circle would ever win. They were wrong. Corbyn and Long-Bailey were in fact not “hard left” by any continental European standards, but the Labour membership was also far less ideological than its erstwhile leaders. The general election was not just a humbling defeat but a profound shock. Labour accepted that something had to change. Starmer emerged as the most pragmatic and electable candidate, and the party faithful chose him.

Starmer will have months to shape his message, but first impressions are key. His victory statement was therefore vital in setting out the early tone—and probably succeeded. He spoke of the human cost of the virus, mentioning how families were “unable even to carry out the most poignant of ceremonies, a funeral, in the way that they would like.” He addressed the importance of society and basic human connection. He promised to work constructively with the government and to scrutinise and challenge it, but not offer “opposition for opposition’s sake.” And he emphasised the need to see key workers for what they really are—essential to our economy and even survival.

One of the principal factors in Corbyn’s defeat was anti-semitism. Even many people who didn’t consider him personally anti-semitic didn’t trust him to root it out. In his statement Starmer tackled the issue simply and directly. It had been a “stain on our party” and he had “seen the grief that it’s brought to so many Jewish communities,” he said. Then came the nine unqualified words many people had waited years to hear: “On behalf of the Labour Party, I am sorry.” It will not be enough on its own—but it was a necessary first step to rebuilding confidence, both inside and outside the community.

Starmer now faces an unprecedented set of challenges. Even if he manages to overcome the issue of anti-semitism, he takes his position during the greatest peacetime crisis in memory. After that is over, he will need to address the second greatest. Coronavirus and Brexit both place the government—and the economy—in profound jeopardy. Starmer must oppose Boris Johnson without being seen to capitalise from national misfortune. The key to that is focussing at all times on the national, rather than the party, interest.

It is in the national interest that the government manages this crisis effectively. It is in the national interest that it rebuilds the economy afterwards. It is in the national interest that we work with other countries and not against them.

Starmer must therefore challenge the government more rigorously than ever. Covid-19 is not an enemy state hoping to exploit domestic division, and he does not need to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt. The only thing that currently matters is defeating the virus, and if the government isn’t doing that properly, Starmer must expose its failings.

We do not yet know how sympathetic the tabloids will be—they monstered Gordon Brown long before Corbyn—but Starmer will need to make his mark fast or be drowned out. That requires him to address both the crisis and its aftermath. The government will likely face its sternest public test in how it rebuilds society. Starmer must have his vision, to coin a phrase, oven-ready.

The test for Starmer will not be to chase headlines but demonstrate maturity. He may never match Johnson in charisma; he could massively outshine him in seriousness. That means calling for an extension to the Brexit transition, to avoid a voluntary economic calamity at a time of deep global recession. It means advocating the softest possible Brexit to ensure the survival of business and supply chains. And it means demonstrating both human compassion and economic competence in every speech and policy. The people elected a comedian when they wanted to be cheered up. Now they just want to survive. The new era will not be for charmers but grown-ups.

But Starmer will be unable to achieve any of this if he does not carry his party alongside him. Corbyn’s loudest supporters were not, in the end, the most numerous or representative. But they still matter. These supporters will now divide into perhaps four groups: those who will cheer Starmer whole-heartedly; those who will give him the benefit of the doubt; those who will sharply criticise him when they see deviation from a pure-left path; and those who will never trust or accept him. The distribution of those categories will be vital. Momentum’s statement, pledging to “hold Keir to account,” does not bode well. Starmer must accept criticism in good faith and engage with his opponents, but also make clear, as Corbyn did, that he has a mandate to lead and will do so. His opponents, for their part, must decide whether it is more important to oppose Starmer or Johnson. Corbyn’s leadership created a hugely impressive online and grassroots network. If Starmer cannot mobilise that machine—if, in effect, he must battle both the Conservatives and his own party networks—he will likely fail before he has even begun.

These times are unprecedented and the political landscape wildly unpredictable. Starmer’s task may prove too vast to surmount. But the Labour Party has given him—and the people of Britain—the best possible chance.