SO MANY spectres are now hovering over Downing Street that it is a challenge to decide which is the one most haunting its residents.

But there is a fair case for deeming it to be Angie Rayner, the departed deputy prime minister.

Rayner is presently serving an indeterminate spell in the sin bin for having possibly failed to pay the correct stamp duty on a property purchase this year.

She has recently started dipping a toe back in the political water, intervening from the backbenches to defend the employment rights legislation from further dilution.

More alarming for Number Ten, her name is also invoked in the undeclared race to succeed Keir Starmer, who has not only lost the dressing room but the entire stadium.

That the Labour Together rats are now canvassing alternatives to the hapless Starmer is the clearest indicator that the ship is sinking.

Some media reports have alleged a secret pact between Rayner and the overtly ambitious Blairite Health Secretary Wes Streeting, with the latter in the top job.

That is not at all likely. One can see it would work for Streeting, otherwise not impressing in his efforts to belatedly establish some “left” credentials.

But why would Rayner wish to sign up for another shift as deputy, when the top role could well be hers?

Assume that Starmer manages to hold on until Labour’s anticipated electoral calamity next May. Rayner’s rehabilitation will surely be complete by then.

If a contest is triggered — either by a prime ministerial resignation or by a “stalking horse” candidate advancing — she will readily secure the 80 MP nominations required to go forward to the wider party electorate.

In the unions, she should profit from her long association with Unison. It is scarcely conceivable that a union with as many members in the NHS could back the arch-privatiser Streeting in any case.

Some smaller unions should also chip in with support. The bigger prize will be Unite, with whom she had a high-profile falling-out over the Birmingham bins dispute.

She will have to overcome that hurdle, but it would be unlikely that Unite would want to sit out a race for prime minister, as it did the recent deputy leadership contest.

And Rayner would have to be favourite to win a Labour membership vote. She seems the only candidate likely to shift the electoral dial in Labour’s favour.

Streeting and Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood — the other rising star of the right — offer only policy continuity, even if they also both enjoy superior communication skills and greater reputations for competence than Starmer.

News alert: communications and competence are icing on a progressive policy cake. Further news: presently, there is no cake, and those two are no bakers.

As for Ed Miliband: smarter and somewhat more principled than the Cabinet average for sure but — been there, done that.

Andy Burnham? Not available, and damaged by his over-reach at Labour conference.

Rayner is charismatic and authentic, with well-known working-class roots. She is on the “soft left,” and has never pretended to be more, but she was always loyal to Jeremy Corbyn during the latter’s leadership.

She can plausibly challenge Reform in the fight for the red wall and at the same time hope to stop the urban drift to the Greens by being, well, more left-wing than Starmer. She not only speaks human, but Labour human — not a lingo most of the cabinet are fluent in.

Rayner has long presented herself as “non-ideological” and pragmatic, attributes entrenched in the history of the British labour movement but which simply describe an unwillingness to embrace systemic change.

Yet she has stuck close to the trade unions throughout her career and is attuned to a sense of class politics.

Of course, there is a case against her too. She has been Starmer’s loyal deputy and therefore implicated in every attack on party and public democracy he has launched, in his abandonment of the entire Corbyn policy agenda and, above all, in his support for the Gaza genocide.

Rayner will have to deal with all of that. All she can realistically do is offer a different policy agenda and a different style of party leadership going forward, pleading that being deputy is not at all the same as being leader.

A declared shift in policy towards Israel will be vital, and Rayner will need to be ready for the resistance such a shift will meet.

Anyone seeking left support will also need to be clear as to what policy they will pursue towards the European Union, and towards the burgeoning militarisation of the economy which may be Starmer’s main legacy.

She will also need to develop a plan to squeeze growth out of a British economy flatlining for nearly a generation and confront the assumptions of the bond market. She may act more decisively on the public utilities.

On balance, Rayner would represent a break with the arid managerialism of Starmer and Blairite neoliberalism, but not with the broader limitations of social democracy.

The consistent left in the PLP may run one of their own when the time comes, but it is very hard to see whoever it is making it onto the ballot paper. Such a candidate could drop out in favour of a “soft left” potential winner at some stage.

That person will be Rayner. She will certainly run. If she wins, she will end the hounding of the Labour left and send Morgan McSweeney packing. The party might learn how to breathe again.

Rayner’s advance evidently scares Starmer and underpins his increasingly desperate praise for his former number two, hoping to entice her back into the relative safety of the Cabinet, where she would be obliged to support the premier.

She is unlikely to accede to those blandishments. She has her eye on Downing Street. The result of that deputy leadership race, a win for the “soft left” Lucy Powell who has little of Rayner’s oomph, suggests it is hers for the taking. That is why Streeting’s allies are trying to talk-up a non-existent deal.

So perhaps it is time for the diminished left in the Labour Party, and socialists in the affiliated unions, to start to seriously consider the possibility of backing Rayner as the next prime minister. It is much easier to identify worse options than better ones.
 

Angry in Tunbridge Wells – and rightly so

Angry of Tunbridge Wells is the archetype of the spluttering reactionary sounding off to the newspapers about everything from the end of national service to the shrinking size of a pack of ready salted.

But last week the good people of that celebrated Kent town, whatever their politics, really had something to rage about. Owing to problems at a water treatment plant, they were without running water for five days or more — more than an inconvenience, a public health crisis.

This was the latest triumph for the privatised water industry, in this case South-East Water. Its chief executive, David Hinton — pay up 30 per cent last year — was nowhere to be seen during the crisis, leaving junior managers to attempt to defend the company’s bungling.

There have been calls for his resignation, the more so since this is far from the first major out(r)age on his watch.

But why stop there? Who are the politicians resolutely keeping this vital industry in the hands of hedge funds and the like, many based abroad and all interested only in profit?

Why have we not heard from Emma Reynolds, the relevant secretary of state since September? Her predecessor, brutish rightwinger Steve Reed, was stalwart in his determination to keep water private — even in the case of bankrupt Thames Water, itself only one accident away from a calamity caused by a collapse in its investment-starved infrastructure?

Nothing better illustrates the nature of this crumbling centrist government than its refusal to end the agony for millions of citizens and take ownership of water, the most vital of resources.

Starmer and Reeves are terrified that if they acted, international investors may take fright. Waterless Tunbridge Wells is a reminder of who this government is really working for.

Down with the lords

An elected government tries to implement its winning manifesto. It is obstructed by an unelected feudal relic. Do you: 1) Give in to the aristos.
2) Abolish the obstruction.
If you went with 1), congratulations — you must be in the government. Anyone looking to win the Labour leadership might now give some thought to prioritising 2).