Given the document below, determine if the summary is factually consistent with the document.
A summary is factually consistent if all statements in the summary are entailed by the document.

Document: Public Services Minister NAME_1 said Labour needed a leader to win elections, not "return to the politics of the 1970s or 1950s". NAME_2 ministers NAME_3 and NAME_4 support NAME_5, while three Labour AMs back NAME_6. No AMs have publicly come out in support of NAME_7. First Minister NAME_8 has not named his preferred candidate, but has said veteran left-winger NAME_9 would be an "unusual choice" for the party. On Wednesday, NAME_10 said he understood the "romantic appeal of anti-austerity politics", but said Labour had to be able to win power to change things. At the general election in May, Labour had "appeared both pro-austerity and economically incompetent, which was a hell of an achievement", he added. "Labour must either be in the business of bringing change or else it is worthless," he said. Declaring his support for Ms NAME_11, NAME_10 said Labour needed a leader "who looks and sounds different from the blokeish Westminster culture, who understands that the personal is political". NAME_9, who ended a two-day campaign visit

Summary: 1. NAME_2 Ministers NAME_12 and NAME_4 support NAME_5, while four Labor members support NAME_6.

Options: "Yes" or "No"

Answer:


 Write your response using less than 700 words.
user