2 min read31 July

She won 309,525 votes (around 66 per cent), with Reform UK candidate Sian Astley receiving 157,178 (around 34 per cent), once first and second preferences were taken into account.

Craig, a close Burnham ally who has led Manchester Council since 2021, said: “I am honoured, I am humbled, and I stand ready to serve the three million people that live across this fantastic city region.”

The turnout was relatively low at just over 25 per cent. 

Labour will now need to choose a new leader of the council to succeed Craig.

The by-election in Manchester was triggered after Burnham won a parliamentary by-election in Makerfield, returning to Westminster as an MP and becoming PM just weeks later.

The Greens were initially confident of success in Greater Manchester, following their victory in the Gorton and Denton parliamentary by-election in February.

Former leader of the Green Party Caroline Lucas told The House in June that the party would be “throwing everything” at the contest. 

However, after the first round of voting in Greater Manchester, the Greens were in third place on 12 per cent. Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain got 9 per cent, the Conservatives 8 per cent, and the Liberal Democrats 3 per cent.

The election used a more proportional voting system than first-past-the-post, in which voters express a first and second choice. Under the system, if no candidate secures 50 per cent of the votes after the first round, then the top two candidates will be given the second preference votes from the defeated candidates.

6 min read10 min

An annual survey carried out by the MPs’ staff Wellness Working Group, shared with PoliticsHome, has shown a record level of distress experienced by MPs’ staff since the survey began in 2000.

From a record 627 staff responses, the survey found that 50.9 per cent of MPs’ staff working across both Parliament and constituency offices are experiencing psychological distress. This is the highest level recorded to date, including during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Sixty-four per cent of respondents also reported difficulty meeting the demands of the job within expected timescales and 34 per cent said their working hours negatively affect their family relationships and friendships.

The survey found MPs’ staff reporting a ‘tsunami’ of casework, with offices struggling to cope with constituents’ increasingly complex demands.

Constituency caseworkers are also exposed to an increasing level of abuse, threats, traumatic disclosures and suicide-related casework. Two-thirds of respondents said they receive suicidal calls from members of the public, with one quarter being active suicide attempts. 

Seventy-eight per cent experience threatening calls and communications.

The survey included disturbing examples of what some MPs’ staff have been sent by members of the public, such as exposed genitals, a bullet sent in the post, and a picture of a dead baby.

Some staff described how this had affected their own mental health, with one saying: “For a few months, I was very depressed after dealing with issues of child abuse and threats of suicide.

“I do not feel that MPs’ offices are given sufficient training or preparation on how to deal with this professionally or given a space to process this afterwards.”

One third of staff – 33 per cent – said they were considering leaving their roles, with survey respondents citing concerns around recruitment, retention and the loss of experienced staff across MPs’ offices. 

Recommendations by the working group include increased funding for more caseworker posts, better communication with the public about what timeframes to expect a response, and work phones provided to all staff.

It also recommended compulsory training for staff in how to handle intimidatory physical and psychological threats.

The survey found disparities between Westminster and constituency-based staff on access to services and workplace standards.

I was very depressed after dealing with issues of child abuse and threats of suicide

One anonymous respondent described how a constituency-based colleague developed a work-related physical condition, but the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) refused to fund adaptive equipment or provide occupational therapy, while members’ services said a parliamentary colleague would have received this support.

“The disparity of support provision from Parliament between parly vs constituency staff is genuinely appalling,” the respondent said.

“Parliament is very Westminster-focused; constituency staff are often forgotten about.”

Levels of dissatisfaction with pay are at a five-year high, with 50 per cent rarely feeling that their pay matches the skills required for their role. The working group has recommended that IPSA reviews the offer to staff, including funding for pay.

Estelle Warhurst, executive committee member of the MPs’ staff Wellness Working Group, told PoliticsHome: “Over the last 10-15 years, there’s been a decrease in services out there for the general public, so increasingly people come to MPs’ offices when they’re in a situation and need some assistance.

“Funding has been cut for places like citizens’ advice bureaus and legal advice centres. So people will tend to come to an MP’s office.”

Having worked in an MPs’ constituency office for more than 20 years, Warhurst said that the ability to recruit staff was not keeping pace with the number of people approaching MPs with complex casework. 

She said that as a result, services offered by MPs have been adapting to manage their time more efficiently. For example, some MPs do not hold face-to-face surgeries anymore, instead communicating via email or video call.

Warhurst said that although the House of Commons was not officially the employer of MPs’ staff – who are directly employed by the MPs themselves – the parliamentary authorities should still step in to make essential staff training compulsory. 

She added that there should be more measures and checks put in place to prevent workplace bullying by MPs towards their staff. 

“There should be mandatory training for MPs when they become an MP,” she said.

“They should have to enrol in something within the House to say that they understand how employment law works and how they should treat people.”

Parliament is very Westminster-focused; constituency staff are often forgotten about

Labour MP Josh Fenton-Glynn, who worked for various trade unions before being elected in 2024, said: “I hope it causes IPSA to reflect on the decision not to increase the allowance to let members take on extra staff.

“People are increasingly turning to MPs for support, and it’s right that we offer it.

“I’ve been involved in politics at different levels for over a decade and have seen the level to which social media has normalised abuse. While my office deals with hundreds of letters a week, we still have constituents take to social media when they’re unhappy with the reply. People forget there are humans at the other end and not just me.”

Fellow Labour MP Adam Thompson said he was “deeply concerned” about the findings. 

“Like many MPs, my team have set up a collaborative environment of mutual support and have undertaken mental health first aid training, but I am always alert to the difficulties that they are facing,” he said.

“With an increasing demand for complex constituency casework, there is always room for increased caseworking capacity and further training for caseworkers.”

An IPSA spokesperson said: “We recognise the dedication of MPs and their staff and value the work of the Wellness Working Group. We have responded positively to their recommendations over the last few years and work closely with them, and with other staff representative groups, to ensure we understand how best we can support MPs’ staff.

“We have received feedback from some offices about the impact rising and increasingly complex casework is having on the wellbeing of MPs’ staff, and in response we have introduced additional, dedicated funding to support those offices facing particular pressures and a ring-fenced training and wellbeing budget. We also have a separate budget that exists to fund workplace adjustments for MPs’ staff in constituencies, as well as for MPs, volunteers, job applicants, or constituencies visiting the office or a surgery.

“We are currently consulting on the framework for setting MPs’ budgets, which seeks feedback on the principles that should guide our decisions and whether the framework remains appropriate. Our role is to balance the resources MPs and their staff need with public confidence in how those resources are used.”

3 min read9 min

In a letter seen by PoliticsHome, 53 parliamentarians have asked Burnham to establish a national commission to examine options for replacing it with a more representative chamber.

“Whilst we welcome the initial steps taken by the government to reform the upper chamber, we remain deeply concerned about the impact its current structure has on people’s lives,” the letter says, adding: “This institution underpins the everyday realities of communities across the UK, and with trust in politics at an all-time low – it is crucial that we have a second chamber that is representative and accountable.”

Parliament has already approved legislation brought forward by the Keir Starmer Labour government to remove the remaining hereditary peers from the upper chamber.

Responding to the letter on Friday, the government pointed to the removal of the hereditaries as an example of fundamental Lords reform, and stressed that the new Prime Minister has a long-term commitment to replace the unelected chamber with something more representative of the regions and nations.

However, the cross-party group expresses concern that government is not moving quickly enough, pointing to Labour’s 2024 manifesto commitment to replace the House of Lords with “an alternative second chamber that is more representative of the regions and nations”.

The letter was organised by the co-chairs of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for House of Lords Reform, Labour MP Dr Simon Opher and former Tory cabinet minister Kit Malthouse, and is signed by MPs such as Labour’s Diane Abbott, Kim Leadbeater and Rosena Allin-Khan; Green MP Ellie Chowns; Plaid’s leader in Westminster Liz Saville-Roberts; and Lib Dem MPs Christine Jardine and Wera Hobhouse.

It recommends that the national commission be made up of citizens and constitutional experts who would be asked to discuss how a more representative second chamber would work. This would be a “clear way in which this government could deliver on its pledge,” according to the group.

It reminds Burnham of comments he made during the Makerfield by-election, which paved the way for him to enter No 10: “I don’t think we can justify half of our national legislature being unelected”, and argues that abolishing the unelected House of Lords would complement his commitment to devolving power away from Westminster and strengthening regional representation.

“As you have committed to making regional representation a cornerstone of your Premiership, this is a significant opportunity to embed that principle into the UK’s constitutional architecture,” they write. 

The letter also points to polling from the UCL Constitution Unit and YouGov showing that 79 per cent of the public support limiting prime ministerial powers to appoint peers and 71 per cent support capping the size of the Lords so that it cannot exceed the Commons. 

“We would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you and to work together towards a legislature that better serves people across every part of the United Kingdom,” it says.