Well, you can say one thing for Andy Burnham – he appears to believe his own hype. “This result will bring about a country that works fairly for everywhere and for everybody,” was his high-flown promise on winning the Makerfield by-election. It was one part election hype, one part mission statement to Labour MPs, but is also backed by self-belief.
And that’s rather appealing. We’ve been missing that optimism. That’s the point of Burnham: to embody the sense of purpose that Labour, and indeed Britain, has lacked for so long.
Labour MPs wanted a plain-talking figure to win against Reform and the Greens, one with the capacity to connect with working class voters and tell them why Labour is the answer to their problems. Now they feel they’ve got him.
But Labour MPs have defenestrated Sir Keir Starmer at a curious moment. The paradox is that in spite of the policy U-turns, poor communication and Mandelson debacle, he had actually started making things better.
Read more:
- Watch your step, Mr Swinney: you could be the next David Cameron
- Good for Mairi McAllan, standing up for immigration
- Keir Starmer’s not great, but who would be better?
- It’s populism — not independence — that threatens to redefine Holyrood
The Prime Minister was the picture of dignity announcing his resignation, reminding us, ironically, why we wanted him as leader after years of Tory chaos. He claimed that his successor will inherit a country “far stronger and fairer than I inherited two years ago”. He pointed to an economy growing faster than other advanced economies, wages consistently rising faster than inflation, infrastructure being built, NHS waiting lists falling in England, major improvements in workers’ rights and renters’ rights, small boat crossings down, rebuilt relationships with the EU and half a million children lifted out of poverty.
His words were an unspoken rebuke to his parliamentary colleagues: I was doing what Labour was elected to do. By getting rid of me, you have only increased public expectations of my successor – probably well beyond what he can deliver.
It now seems almost inevitable that the Manchester mayor will become Prime Minister and the realities of government will test him from day one. On July 1, the energy price cap will rise by 13 per cent, largely due to the US-Israel war with Iran, and could edge up further in October, meaning that soul-sapping cost-of-living pressures will dominate the public debate come winter. Inflation could rise too.
Burnham uses the right language – “reindustrialisation” of left-behind areas which presumably include parts of Scotland; “greater public control” over key industries; moving ahead with a National Care Service. But it doesn’t – yet – amount to that longed-for Labour vision, nor will it deliver results quickly. His challenge will be to keep the optimism alive with a sceptical, fed-up public that’s short on patience.
Burnham’s main support comes from Labour MPs who want what the Alloa and Grangemouth MP Brian Leishman calls a “change of political direction”. That means higher spending. The welfare bill is set to rise dramatically without government intervention and many of the same MPs that back Burnham balk at measures that would rein it in.
Yet at the same time, pressure is intensifying to increase spending on defence by tens of billions, even though Keir Starmer has already presided over the biggest hike in defence spending since the Cold War. How will Burnham tackle conundrums like that?
As a minister under Gordon Brown, he was not particularly left wing. He has signalled a leftward turn in more recent years but shifts political positions, for example on the Waspi women and on the bond markets, so we don’t really know what path he will take. He says he’ll adopt Starmer’s position on some key issues but that could change.
Those who have worked closely with him describe a man who likes to be liked; Burnham describes himself as an “instinctive” politician who has a “feel” for where to stand on a given issue. Some observers fear that really means telling people what they want to hear. He needs to be responsive to MPs but will he be his own man?
There are so many unanswered questions. How will Andy Burnham shore up the UK’s defence capabilities? How will he handle Donald Trump? How will he deliver sustainable economic growth? How will he tackle entrenched inequality? How will he sustain rising living standards? How will he harness the advantages of AI while protecting society from its adverse consequences? How will he continue the transition to a green economy? And how will he meet Labour MPs’ expectation of higher spending while making the public finances more sustainable? Are we talking about more tax rises – and if so, on whom?
Burnham’s version of “Manchesterism” he has described as using devolved power to make local economic decisions that bring benefits to different, neglected communities within a region. He favours “business-friendly socialism” and frequently rejects trickle-down economics. The achievement he’s most associated with is taking buses into public ownership, though arguably he mentions it a little too often. There have been missteps too, such as the introduction of a Clean Air Zone which was later withdrawn. He’s not, in fact, the Messiah.
But Burnham does have a talent for getting people to vote for him. This won’t endear him to the SNP and nor will his status as an English regional champion. A persistent critic of Westminster centralisation and a strong voice for those who live north of Watford, he won’t easily be portrayed by the SNP as indifferent to Scotland.
Many Scottish communities see themselves reflected in the people of Greater Manchester. The parallels between Glasgow and Manchester are unmissable, both having been industrial powerhouses with large working-class populations and a legacy of challenges stemming from the decline of heavy industry.
Having used his devolved powers dynamically, Burnham is in a position to call out Scottish politicians who try and pass the buck for under-performance. His support for the decentralisation of financial decision-making within England could help to rebalance a Westminster-centric UK.
We’ll see. One of his first tasks will be to appoint a cabinet and a big question is whether Sir Keir Starmer will be in it. The outgoing PM would, you feel, be a good foil for Burnham, the careful, details-oriented technocrat counterbalancing the vibes guy. Perhaps Starmer could become foreign secretary.
But that’s for later. For now, we find ourselves yet again encouraged to believe that changing the person at the top will change the nation’s fortunes. Hey, perhaps this time really will be different.
Rebecca McQuillan is a journalist specialising in politics and Scottish affairs. She can be found on Bluesky at @becmcq.bsky.social and on X at @BecMcQ
Share