Labour minister Steve Reed has been accused of hypocrisy over his decision to back Andy Burnham in the Labour leadership contest, after spending months vigorously defending Keir Starmer. The accusation came in a heated exchange on The Camilla Tominey Show on GB News, where the Housing Secretary was repeatedly pressed on what was described as a “ridiculous” shift in allegiance.
Tominey, an associate editor and executive editor of The Daily Telegraph, launched the interview by reminding Reed that he had been “staunchly in bat for Keir Starmer last month, telling everybody he’s the best thing since sliced bread”. She then pointed out that within weeks he was “fully supporting Andy Burnham”, the former Mayor of Greater Manchester who is widely expected to replace Starmer after the Prime Minister announced his resignation on 22 June. “The public must look at this and think it’s absolutely ridiculous,” she said, adding that Burnham had “stabbed him in the back”. She went on to suggest that Reed, along with figures such as Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves, was “lining yourself up for a new job in a new cabinet”.
Reed, who has been the Labour MP for Streatham and Croydon North since 2012 and is regarded as a key ally of the outgoing leader – having backed Starmer in the 2020 contest – insisted there was nothing inconsistent about his position. “We’re going to elect a new leader who will become Prime Minister,” he said. “Of the options available, I think Andy Burnham is the best option.” He argued that supporting a leader until they resign and then backing their successor is a normal part of the political process. “Precisely what is the problem in supporting somebody until they resign? And then you have to support somebody else?” he asked. “You invited me to give you my opinion. I’ve given my opinion. You may not like my opinion, but that is my opinion.”
The minister, who previously served as Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs before taking on the housing brief, sought to shift the focus away from internal party manoeuvring. He accused critics of obsessing over “Politics Top Trumps” rather than the substance of government policy. “I don’t really care about this Politics Top Trumps that your show seems obsessed with,” he said. “I’m much more interested in the public and the change we can make for the public.” Reed’s own parliamentary record includes pioneering “Seni’s Law” to protect mental health patients from violent restraint, securing the removal of flammable cladding from housing blocks, and handling more than 120,000 constituent cases.
Burnham, who recently won the seat of Makerfield with the explicit aim of challenging for the leadership, is considered the strong front-runner in the contest. His tenure as Mayor of Greater Manchester earned him the nickname “King of the North” after highly publicised clashes with the previous Conservative government over regional funding during the pandemic. He has been associated with a “Manchesterism” approach emphasising regional devolution and economic rebalancing. Under Labour’s internal rules, candidates must be MPs and secure nominations from 20% of Labour MPs (currently 81 MPs), as well as 5% of Constituency Labour Parties or at least three affiliates. The timetable, as of late June, sets MP nominations from 9-15 July, with a potential winner announced by 29 August if a ballot is required, or as early as 17 July if only one candidate emerges.
The exchange became increasingly sharp when Tominey questioned whether Burnham had any democratic mandate to become Prime Minister without a general election. “If Andy Burnham’s so great, why don’t you have a general election?” she asked. Reed responded by pointing to the nature of the British system. “We live in a parliamentary democracy. MPs choose the leader and Prime Minister,” he said. Tominey then pressed Reed on what she called Labour “hypocrisy”, recalling that both Reed and Burnham had tweeted “hashtag general election now” after the resignation of Liz Truss. Reed pushed back, arguing that the circumstances were entirely different. “Back then, I think the public wanted a general election we just had. We were placing our third Prime Minister in two months, and Liz Truss had crashed the economy,” he said. “They were in chaos. We are not. This is a smooth transition, and through it all, I’m going to keep focused, as we all are on the British public and delivering the change they want to see.”
