Letters to the Editor – week ending 09 August 2026

Read what people have been writing to our editor about this week. Find out how to share your own views here.

Voting and demographics

Dear Editor,

I note interesting voting statistics in the Manchester Mayoral By-Election. Overall the Green vote was 5 per cent up on the 2024 result. It was up 14 per cent in the City of Manchester, 3 per cent in Rochdale and was flat in Oldham. This is interesting as, as all three boroughs have a similar size of Muslim population (22 per cent, 19 per cent  and 24 per cent), they have rather different graduate population (37 per cent, 26 per cent, 25 per cent).

This may just be statistical noise; it may be that the issue of Gaza has declining salience, or that just that the Craig/Burnham focus on a steady stream of bread and butter issues crowds out Gaza as an issue. I was in Manchester for the week of the elections, and the main social messages I got from the Greens was a plan to twin Manchester with Nablus in the West Bank and an anti-developer message. It may be that the anti-developer message just did not resonate in the outer boroughs.

Whatever may be the explanation, I would be interested in hearing from someone who may have a sense of the causes on the ground, as I imagine there may be valuable lessons further afield than Manchester. 

Best wishes,

Daniel Elton   

*****

Andy Burnham’s opening fortnight has been energetic and purposeful, and his article in Labour List, ‘The rewiring of Britain has begun’, shows a Prime Minister determined to move fast and define the political weather. His agenda on devolution, technical education, social care and rough sleeping is welcome- especially the commitment to “the biggest devolution of power to mayors in modern English history” and the promise to end the era of local leaders “coming cap in hand to Westminster”. It is refreshing to see a PM who is not afraid to spend political capital on long‑ignored issues like adult social care.

But if Burnham is serious about “rewiring economic and political power in Britain”, he must confront a gap in his narrative. His vision speaks confidently about working‑class identity, deindustrialisation and local pride, yet says almost nothing about the full diversity of modern Britain. Communities shaped by ethnicity, culture and faith are central to the country’s social and economic fabric, but they barely feature in his account of national renewal, so far.

A government that promises to “share power, not hoard it” cannot afford to treat diversity as an afterthought. If Burnham wants this rewiring to succeed, he must actively recognise and engage the richness of Britain’s communities, and not just the ones that fit the traditional Labour story. Devolution, care reform, education pathways and rough sleeping strategies will all fall short unless they are designed with the realities of diverse communities in mind.

Burnham has made a strong start. The next step is to broaden the lens and ensure this new era of Labour government speaks to all of Britain, not just part of it.

Prof. Javed Khan OBE

*****

Dear Editor

As a Labour supporter and member for over 50 years I am of course delighted at the appointment of our new Prime Minister and the election of our new Mayor of Greater Manchester.

However, I am concerned that the elections of the Labour government, the Member for Makerfield, and the Mayor of Manchester do not reflect the wishes of the majority of the respective electorates.

The government won the election with a 37% share of the vote. This means that 63% of those who voted did not vote Labour. With a turn out of 59.7% this means that only 22% of the total electorate voted Labour – little more than a fifth.

In the Makerfield by-election Andy Burnham won 54.8% of the vote on a turnout of 58.7% which means that just 32% of the eligible voters voted for Andy.

In Manchester Bev Craig won 48% of the first preference votes on a turnout of 25%, which means that just 12% of the Manchester electorate wanted a Labour Mayor.

Of course, it is true to say that all of the other parties did worse, but this is hardly the point. These figures illustrate a disenchantment with politics, and a sense that moving the pieces around the board changes nothing.

We are hoping that Andy Burnham and his team will bring about real change. I would feel more comfortable if we could point to a majority of the electorate supporting us. That is, after all, the definition of democracy. 

With best regards

Gerry Higgs
Member of Cities of London and Westminster CLP

*****

Values and Valued members

Good morning

Just read your article on the shocking drop in membership. I’m on the EC of Lewisham North. CLP and we’ve been seeing our membership grow for the first time since Labour came to power. The change happened shortly after the May local elections. I’d be interested to hear if others in the country are seeing a similar effect. We’re unsure how much is a reaction to the greens wiping us out and how much is a Burnham bounce, however the change of mood in our local party from gritty determination to hope after a huge local election defeat has been good to see.

Best Wishes

Chris Withers

*****

Dear team

I resigned as Chair of the Shropshire Hills branch this year after nearly 5 years. I am still a member but wanted to point out a big reason gap in your article.

Labour’s stance on the proscription of Palestine Action, tacit support for the war crimes of Israel and then continuing with the appeal, jailing so many innocent peaceful protesters is a big break from labour values. This lost us the most members. Whilst we recognise the need for juggling the finances, to be the party to decimate the international aid budget with our horrifying colonial past, is hard to swallow.  If Burnham allows drilling and damages the green journey we will lose even more to the Green party.

We have some renewed optimism from the public but we need to restate our values as a party if membership is to return. You don’t join a club that is playing the wrong game.

Labour die-hards like me were heartened by Starmer’s stance with Trump on use of bases and international alliance building. We now need for Burnham to do the right thing for our young people and create meaningful jobs on the back of a compelling Industrial strategy, a strategy for rural Britain with Food Security and a continued commitment to green energy.  Israel and the US should receive the same apartheid treatment of S Africa in the 1970s/80s and the same sanctions as Russia.  

Best regards,

Shanthi Flynn

*****

Good morning to all those involved with the LabourList, 

We read your recent article on Labour values this morning with great interest. It asks an important question: what do Labour’s values actually mean in practice?

The article argues that Labour exists to address the inequalities created by “luck”. Yet what happened to the 3.6 million women born in the 1950s was not a matter of luck. It was the direct consequence of government policy and, as the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has confirmed, maladministration by the Department for Work and Pensions.

UK Labour itself recognised this while in opposition. Over almost two years, Labour MPs, the APPG on State Pension Inequality for Women, campaign representatives from across the United Kingdom and pensions expert Lord Bryn Davies worked together to scrutinise and examine the evidence in detail; and developed a fully costed, evidence-based compensation framework. That work reflected Labour’s commitment to fairness, accountability and justice.

The evidence has not changed. The Ombudsman’s finding has not changed. The injustice has not changed. Only Labour’s position after entering government has changed.

If Labour values truly mean confronting injustice rather than accepting it, then this is surely the moment to demonstrate those principles in practice. The answer is not more litigation or continued delay, but constructive engagement.

We have again written to Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Chancellor John Healey asking them to restore Labour’s own evidence-based compensation framework and agree to independent mediation with the APPG and leaders of all representative 1950s women’s campaign groups.

We have also asked that Anne Keen, one of the original founders of the WASPI campaign, be invited to participate. Anne worked alongside many of us and Lord Bryn Davies throughout the development of Labour’s compensation framework, and her knowledge, evidence and long-standing engagement with Labour would be invaluable in helping reach a fair resolution.

This is an opportunity for Labour to show that its values are more than words. Acknowledging wrongdoing without providing redress falls short of the fairness and accountability that have always been at the heart of the Labour movement.

We hope LabourList will continue to encourage discussion about how Labour’s values can be translated into action for the millions of 1950s-born women who are still waiting for justice.

Yours sincerely,

Jackie Gilderdale,
Organiser on behalf of 1950s Women Justice Alliance – A UK wide coalition of Regional Women’s Pension Groups. 

SHARE:

If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected]

• SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
• BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
• PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
• ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].