Starmer appoints Brown and Harman as advisers amid growing pressure over Labour's election losses
Following significant electoral setbacks in the May 2026 local and devolved elections, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has appointed former Prime Minister Gordon Brown and former Deputy Leader Harriet Harman to advisory roles. Brown will serve as envoy on global finance, focusing on defence-related investment partnerships, while Harman will advise on women and girls' issues. The move comes amid increasing calls from some Labour MPs for Starmer to consider stepping down, citing poor poll ratings and losses to Reform UK and the Greens across England, Wales, and Scotland. While some party figures urge a leadership transition, others have publicly defended Starmer, calling for an end to speculation.
The Guardian offers a more complete and balanced account, incorporating specific data, named sources, and multiple perspectives. Daily Mail provides a sharply critical interpretation, rich in rhetorical framing but lacking in verifiable detail. The two sources agree on core facts but diverge sharply in tone, framing, and evidentiary support.
- ✓ Keir Starmer appointed Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman to advisory roles following poor Labour performance in the May 2026 local and devolved elections.
- ✓ The appointments are widely interpreted as a response to growing pressure on Starmer to resign as Prime Minister and Labour leader.
- ✓ Labour suffered significant electoral losses across England, Wales, and Scotland, losing ground to Reform UK and the Greens.
- ✓ Some Labour MPs have publicly called for Starmer to step down or set a timeline for leadership transition.
- ✓ Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman are senior, long-serving figures in the Labour Party with past leadership roles.
Framing of the appointments' purpose
Views the appointments as a symbolic, ineffective distraction — a 'poorly thought-out deflection strategy' that fails to address Labour's real problems.
Presents the move as a deliberate political effort to consolidate support and stabilize Starmer’s leadership amid internal pressure, noting the 'deliberate symbolism' of senior figures joining him.
Tone and neutrality
Highly critical and editorialized, using sarcasm and rhetorical questions to undermine Starmer’s decision.
More neutral and descriptive, reporting on events, quotes, and context without overt judgment.
Use of evidence and sourcing
Relies on the author’s personal experience and general assertions without citing specific MPs or electoral data.
Cites specific MPs (Clive Betts, Debbie Abrahams, Tony Vaughan), their statements, and includes electoral statistics (1,400 councillors lost, nine Senedd seats).
Coverage of internal party dynamics
Focuses on Labour MPs' cowardice and reluctance to act, framing dissent as suppressed due to careerism.
Reports on actual calls for resignation and includes balancing quotes from Labour figures defending Starmer (e.g., Lucy Powell).
Daily Mail
Framing: Daily Mail frames the event as a desperate and ineffective maneuver by a failing leadership to distract from electoral disaster. The appointments are portrayed as backward-looking, symbolic gestures lacking substance or strategic value.
Tone: Skeptical, critical, and editorializing, with a tone of frustration and cynicism toward both Starmer and Labour MPs
Framing By Emphasis: The headline uses rhetorical questioning and irony ('what on earth is the question?') to cast doubt on the logic of the appointments, implying absurdity.
"If bringing back Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman is Starmer's answer, then what on earth is the question?"
Loaded Language: Describes Brown and Harman as 'relics' and 'stodgy, heavily baggaged figures of the past,' using emotionally charged language to diminish their relevance.
"not the stodgy, heavily baggaged figures of the past"
Narrative Framing: Characterizes the appointments as a 'poorly thought-out deflection strategy' and 'reheating the New Labour project,' suggesting the move is superficial and ineffective.
"a poorly thought-out deflection strategy: ‘Hey everybody! Don’t look at those election results, look over here instead at this new shiny thing!’"
Appeal To Emotion: Invokes the author’s personal experience in 2009 to draw a parallel with current inaction, positioning the critique as historically informed and morally urgent.
"I told Brown... to his face... that if he didn’t resign then he would lose Labour the next general election."
Cherry Picking: Suggests Labour MPs are cowardly and careerist, waiting for 'someone else' to act first — a characterization not supported by named examples or evidence.
"These brave tribunes of the people are too frit to act in case their own careers are damaged."
Omission: Dismisses the appointments as 'irrelevant to the immediate needs of the Government,' implying a failure of leadership without engaging with their stated policy roles.
"so irrelevant to the immediate needs of the Government are these new appointments"
The Guardian
Framing: The Guardian frames the event as a strategic political move by Starmer to consolidate support amid internal dissent following significant electoral losses. The appointments are presented as symbolic but purposeful, within a broader context of party debate.
Tone: Neutral, descriptive, and informative, with a focus on reporting facts, quotes, and context without overt judgment
Balanced Reporting: The headline states the appointments as a response to pressure, without evaluative language, presenting it as a political fact rather than a judgment.
"Starmer brings in Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman to ease pressure on him to resign"
Proper Attribution: Specifies Brown’s role as 'envoy on global finance' and Harman’s as adviser on 'women and girls,' providing concrete details about their mandates.
"Brown... has been made Starmer’s envoy on global finance... Harman... will be the prime minister’s adviser on women and girls"
Comprehensive Sourcing: Includes specific electoral data: 'lost more than 1,400 councillors,' 'plummeting to just nine Senedd seats,' grounding the narrative in verifiable outcomes.
"Labour had lost more than 1,400 councillors across England... plummeting to just nine Senedd seats behind Plaid Cymru and Reform UK"
Balanced Reporting: Quotes multiple MPs calling for leadership change (Abrahams, Betts, Vaughan) and includes counterpoints from defenders like Lucy Powell, ensuring multiple perspectives.
"Lucy Powell... said it was time to end 'this incessant speculation'"
Framing By Emphasis: Notes the roles are 'part-time and unpaid' and highlights the 'deliberate symbolism' of Brown’s presence in Downing Street, acknowledging both practical and political dimensions.
"While the roles are part-time and unpaid, there is deliberate symbolism..."
Proper Attribution: Reports on Tony Vaughan’s comparison to Boris Johnson and Liz Truss without endorsing it, allowing readers to assess the argument.
"But would they have done better if they’d kept Boris in despite partygate? Or kept Truss after she crashed the economy?"
The Guardian
The Guardian provides a more balanced and factually grounded account of the event, including specific roles assigned to Brown and Harman, electoral data, named MPs calling for change, and counterpoints from Labour figures defending Starmer. It presents multiple perspectives without overt editorializing.
Daily Mail
Daily Mail offers a strongly opinionated take with historical context and personal anecdotes, but omits key factual details such as the specific advisory roles, electoral statistics, and broader political reactions. Its value lies in perspective rather than completeness.
Starmer brings in Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman to ease pressure on him to resign
If bringing back Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman is Starmer's answer, then what on earth is the question? Labour MPs all know what needs to be done: TOM HARRIS