Given the document below, determine if the summary is factually consistent with the document. Together with the answer provide evidence that supports it. 

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

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

Answer "Yes" or "No" and provide evidence.

Answer:


 Avoid using the following keywords: change, name_7, name_12, ministers
user