Anyone on the right hoping those remaining are on their side is fooling themselves
In the quiet arithmetic of party democracy, Wes Streeting confronts a truth that ministerial competence cannot rewrite: the people who choose Labour's next leader are not, by and large, the people who share his politics. As Labour's membership has contracted since 2020 — shedding more than 200,000 souls to disillusionment and departure — those who remain have grown more ideologically distinct, more wary of rightward pivots, and more drawn to figures like Andy Burnham, who commands 42% support against Streeting's 11%. The succession question is, at its core, a question about trust — whether a party burned by one leader's repositioning can be persuaded to believe in another's.
- A Compass survey of over a thousand Labour members reveals a chasm: Andy Burnham commands 42% support for the next leadership, while Streeting — despite Westminster's confidence in his readiness — draws only 11%.
- Labour's membership has collapsed from 532,000 in 2019 to 333,000 by end of 2024, and those who stayed skew heavily left, making the ideological terrain increasingly hostile to soft-right candidates.
- Streeting has begun moving leftward in recent months, but the manoeuvre carries its own risk — members who watched Starmer win on left-leaning pledges and then govern differently are in no mood for another tactical conversion.
- Professor Tim Bale identifies the one thread Streeting might pull: Labour members chose Starmer over Corbyn's heir in 2020 because they believed he could win, and electability still matters to a party that spent a decade in opposition.
- The path forward is narrow — Streeting must convince a sceptical, leftward-leaning base not only that he can deliver electoral victory, but that he can be trusted to do so without abandoning the party's soul a second time.
Wes Streeting has a problem that ministerial competence alone cannot solve. As health secretary and a leading contender to succeed Keir Starmer, he carries what Westminster considers an ideal profile: executive experience, establishment backing, and perceived readiness. Yet when Compass surveyed more than a thousand Labour members, only 11% named him as their preferred next leader. Forty-two percent chose Andy Burnham.
The gap is ideological. Burnham sits to Streeting's left and earned a 44% favourability rating among members; Streeting managed 18%, clustering with Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband — figures viewed more warmly by the base despite their own ambitions. Streeting is rooted in Labour's soft right, shaped by the Progress wing and its Blairite lineage. In recent months he has begun repositioning leftward, but the timing is treacherous. Members who watched Starmer win the 2020 leadership on left-leaning commitments — and then govern differently — have grown deeply wary of such pivots.
The membership itself has transformed. Labour peaked at over 532,000 members at the end of 2019; by late 2024, that figure had fallen to 333,235. More than 200,000 people left — for the Greens, for other parties, or for no party at all. Those who remained, according to Queen Mary University research, skew heavily left, with roughly 48% describing themselves as fairly leftwing. Tim Bale, a politics professor at Queen Mary, is blunt: anyone on Labour's right hoping the remaining membership is on their side is probably fooling themselves.
Yet Bale identifies a narrow opening. Labour members proved in 2020 that they will prioritise electability — choosing Starmer over Corbyn's preferred successor because they believed he could win. If Streeting can make that case convincingly, he retains a chance. The difficulty is that the party has already been burned once by a leader who promised one thing and delivered another. Streeting must demonstrate not just that he can win, but that he can be trusted to do so on terms the membership can live with.
Wes Streeting has a problem that no amount of ministerial competence can solve. As health secretary and one of the leading contenders to eventually succeed Keir Starmer as Labour leader, he possesses what many in Westminster consider the ideal profile for high office: he is thought to be ready for the job, he has executive experience, and he has the backing of the party establishment. But when Compass surveyed more than a thousand Labour members about who should lead them next, only 11% named Streeting. Forty-two percent picked Andy Burnham instead.
The gap reflects something deeper than mere preference. Burnham, who sits to the left of Streeting on Labour's ideological map, earned a 44% favourability rating among members. Streeting managed 18%. He found himself clustered with Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband in the rankings—both of whom, despite their own leadership ambitions, were viewed more warmly by the party base than he was. The arithmetic is stark: the majority of Labour members appear to want a successor who does not occupy the political space where Streeting stands.
This is the inheritance of a particular history. Streeting is a creature of the soft right, formerly close to Peter Mandelson and rooted in the Progress wing that traces its lineage back to Tony Blair. In recent months, he has begun repositioning himself further left, a tactical move presumably designed to broaden his appeal to the members who will ultimately choose the next leader from a slate nominated by MPs. But the timing matters. Labour members have grown wary of such pivots. When Keir Starmer won the leadership in 2020 on a platform of commitments to the left, many members believed he later abandoned those pledges once in power. The disillusionment that followed has been measurable and real.
The party has hemorrhaged members since Starmer took over from Jeremy Corbyn in April 2020. Labour peaked at just over 532,000 members at the end of 2019. By the close of 2024, that number had fallen to 333,235—a loss of more than 200,000 people. Some departed for the Greens or other parties. Others simply walked away from organized politics altogether. Those who remained, according to research from Queen Mary University of London, skew heavily left: roughly 48% describe themselves as fairly leftwing, and the overall membership tilts toward the soft left.
Tim Bale, a politics professor at Queen Mary, sees the mathematics working against Streeting. "Lots of grassroots members have left Labour since the general election," Bale observed, "either to join the Greens or just to give up belonging to any party." The members who stayed are not, he suggested, waiting to be convinced by a rightward-leaning candidate. "Anyone on the right of the Labour party hoping that this means those remaining are on their side is probably fooling themselves."
Yet Bale also identified a narrow opening. Labour members, he noted, care about winning elections. They proved this in 2020 when they chose Starmer over Rebecca Long-Bailey, Corbyn's preferred successor, because they believed Starmer could deliver electoral victory. If Streeting can make that case convincingly—if he can persuade members that his path leads back to power—he retains a chance despite his ideological distance from the base. The challenge is that members have already been burned once by a leader who promised one thing and delivered another. Streeting will need to show not just that he can win, but that he can be trusted to do so on terms the party can live with.
Citações Notáveis
Lots of grassroots members have left Labour since the general election, either to join the Greens or just to give up belonging to any party.— Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London
Anyone on the right of the Labour party hoping that this means those remaining are on their side is probably fooling themselves.— Tim Bale
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does Streeting's position on the right of the party matter so much if he's the most ready candidate for the job?
Because Labour members choose the leader, not Westminster. And those members have spent the last four years watching Starmer abandon promises they thought he made. They're not in a forgiving mood.
But if members care about winning elections, shouldn't that override ideology?
It should, in theory. But there's a catch—members have to believe him. Streeting repositioning himself leftward now, after years of being a Blairite, looks like exactly the kind of calculation that burned them before.
So he's trapped between two audiences?
Exactly. MPs might nominate him because he looks electable. But members will choose from that list, and they're skeptical of anyone who seems to be performing for them.
What would actually change their minds?
Proof that he can win without betraying what they believe in. But that's a narrow road, and he's already walking it late.
Could the membership shift back toward the center over time?
Unlikely. The people who left were the ones most willing to compromise. What's left is more ideologically committed. The party has sorted itself.