Who will replace Angela Rayner?

The Labour deputy leadership contest is shaping up to be less a tidy succession and more a proxy war for the soul of the party. With Angela Rayner’s resignation triggering the first deputy leadership election in government since 2007, the stakes are high – not because the role itself is constitutionally powerful, but because of what it can symbolise. In opposition, the deputy leader can be a media-friendly counterweight to the leader. In government, it’s more complicated. The position can be entirely ceremonial; or it can become a lightning rod for internal dissent, a legitimised platform for alternative voices, and a rallying point for those who feel the party is drifting from its roots. 

This is precisely why the current contest matters. The candidates aren’t just vying for a title: they’re positioning themselves as either loyal amplifiers of Starmerism or as potential thorns in its side. Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, is the most senior figure in the race and the clearest continuity candidate. Her campaign is pitched as unifying and pragmatic, with a focus on delivering for working people and taking the fight to Reform UK. She’s the candidate most likely to be co-opted into government decision-making, should she win. But her presence also signals that Starmer wants the deputy leadership to remain firmly tethered to the Cabinet table. 

Emily Thornberry, meanwhile, is running on a platform that’s more reflective, even contrite. She’s talking about mistakes, about listening, and about representing the membership – not just the leadership. Her campaign touches on welfare reform, wealth taxes, and Gaza, suggesting she’s willing to speak to the parts of the party that feel unheard. Thornberry’s long-standing presence in Labour politics gives her credibility, but also baggage. She’s not quite insurgent, but she’s not entirely establishment either. 

Bell Ribeiro-Addy is the left’s standard bearer, and she’s not hiding her disdain for the process. Her campaign launched with a critique of the compressed timetable: just three days to secure 80 MP nominations and two trade union backers. It’s a high bar, and one that many on the left see as a deliberate stitch-up. The speed and structure of the contest have sparked fury, particularly among those who see it as a mechanism to keep dissenting voices off the ballot. Whether or not she makes it, the sentiment is clear: the left feels squeezed out. 

That frustration was palpable at the TUC annual conference in Brighton, where the politicking was intense. Alison McGovern, who has since announced her candidacy, was spotted on manoeuvres, refusing to deny her intentions when asked directly during a panel appearance. Thornberry’s campaign manager was also seen working the room. With all candidates needing two union endorsements to make the ballot, the TUC conference became a de facto hustings.  

Lucy Powell’s candidacy adds another layer of intrigue. Recently sacked by Starmer as Leader of the House of Commons, Powell is running with the backing of Andy Burnham, the Greater Manchester Mayor and perennial leadership contender. Burnham’s support is not incidental; it’s strategic. He’s just launched Mainstream, a new centre-left network aimed at creating a “popular left alternative” to the current direction of Labour in government. Powell’s campaign is its first real test. Her pitch, rooted in unity, regional representation, and a more pluralistic party culture, mirrors Burnham’s own critique of factionalism. If Powell performs well, it will be seen as a soft launch for Burnham’s long-term leadership ambitions. If she falters, it may expose the limits of his influence beyond Greater Manchester. 

Paula Barker, MP for Liverpool Wavertree, has also confirmed her candidacy, bringing the total number of declared candidates to six. A former union official and a consistent voice on the party’s left, Barker’s entry adds further pressure to an already crowded field. She’s said her numbers are “looking healthy”, but like others outside the Cabinet, she faces the same uphill battle to meet the nomination threshold in time. Her candidacy, however, ensures that the left flank of the party is not represented by a single voice, and that the contest cannot be easily framed as a binary between loyalty and rebellion. 

However, not all six are likely to make it onto the ballot. The nomination threshold is steep, and the compressed timeline means only those with pre-existing networks and machinery stand a chance. The PLP vote could also act as a gatekeeper, preventing candidates less aligned with Starmer from progressing. If that happens, the contest risks becoming a coronation rather than a referendum. 

That’s the real tension here. The deputy leadership election could be a moment of democratic reckoning: a chance for the membership to express how they feel about the direction of the party in government. But if the ballot is stacked with loyalists, the result will be read as an endorsement of Starmerism. If a left-wing candidate makes it through, and performs well, it will be seen as a warning shot. Either way, the outcome will be interpreted as a barometer of internal satisfaction. 

This is why the role matters. Not because it carries executive power, but because it offers a platform. A deputy leader on the backbenches, with a mandate from the membership, can become a powerful voice for alternative ideas. They can’t overturn policy, but they can shape the conversation. They can’t block decisions, but they can force the leadership to listen. And in a party as historically fractious as Labour, that’s no small thing. 

So, while the contest may look procedural, it’s anything but. It’s a test of how pluralistic Labour wants to be in government, and it’s a test of whether the membership still has a meaningful say in the party’s direction. The deputy leadership might not matter structurally, but symbolically, it matters a great deal.