When Andy Burnham came to power six weeks hence, the exhaust fumes of Keir Starmer’s removal lorry still hanging in the air, I wrote a précis of his first week at the helm, musing on cabinet picks and possible directions of travel for the newly installed government. After the return of parliament and amidst conference season, however, I felt the urge to see how Andy is getting on.
If you follow my social media, you may well be aware of my views on Team Burnham, but I wanted to break a few things down. In particular, I want to talk about the continual briefings and counter-briefings after negative media reports. In the biz, it’s called ‘kite-flying’ and all political parties have done it, but are Burnham and Co. allowing public mood to define policy? Perhaps.
Ambitious beginnings
You can read my first week report card here.
Team Andy hit the ground running with a flurry of announcements aimed at giving the country a little cost-of-living boost before the serious business of governing took over. Slightly cheaper bus fares went down well with city dwellers, but the removal of VAT on energy bills was immediately sideswiped by the imperious Martin Lewis’ prediction that our energy cap hike would override any savings. So far, so iffy. Burnham announced an end to rough sleeping by Christmas, but within a couple of days said that it may not be possible. Another announcement that would save pubs around £1,000 was met with derision throughout the industry.
As the summer rolled on, and we found ourselves in drought exacerbated by climate emergency, the news cycle became fairly apocalyptic – wildfires raged across the country and two trains derailed within two days of each other, likely due to the extreme heat. There are serious questions to be asked of previous governments about climate change, but Burnham eventually, and to my mind begrudgingly, made a statement about our driest and most dangerous summer on record.
Keep that fact in mind when I discuss North Sea drilling.
Further announcements followed throughout our parched summer but many of them were policies already announced under the Starmer/Reeves administration. Team Andy started to falter slightly when this was repeatedly pointed out. Claiming credit for the work of others is disingenuous, at best. By my reckoning, the Burnham faction has announced 17 headline policies in five weeks, but only five are new. The eight examples below show the ones I feel to be most egregious, including one that was even ratified under the previous Conservative government.
The Manchester team have quickly become very adept at announcing delivery on the already moving policy machine that started under Starmer/Reeves, but let’s be fair and look at what they have announced, in real terms, that is genuinely new.
- Temporary abolition of VAT on domestic electricity
- Restoration of the £2 bus cap
- Scrapping Starmer’s compulsory digital-ID proposal
- No 10 North
- 24/7 disabled concessionary bus travel nationally
- £65m drought package
- Mayors retaining a share of income tax
And in the sense of fairness again, this is, technically, not a new government, only a new leader and cabinet. Is it really that bad, claiming credit for his party’s successes, even though it was not his doing? I’ll leave that sitting with you, but in Burnham’s first prime ministerial speech on 20 July he said “We have not been good enough” and he called for a “circuit breaker for Britain”, promising both “a new political model and a new economic model”.
An early end to a brief honeymoon
Let’s fast-forward to Friday 28 August when the headlines painted a stark picture, different from the bold words uttered barely a month previous. John Healey, giving an interview to Sky’s Sam Coates, said that Burnham was merely the new leader of a continuity government. A far cry from the statement given above: a new political and economic model.
Two of the most contentious and much vaunted policies of the Burnham era so far may have to be shelved as they come to terms with the fact that Rachel Reeves may have actually known what she was talking about.
John Healey resigned from his post as defence secretary under Keir Starmer in a much publicised hissy-fit about not being able to commit to 3% of GDP spending on defence – a move that started the ball rolling towards Starmer’s own rapid resignation. Now, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he has suddenly been faced with the reality of his role. Reeves and Starmer, much hated though they were by the media, were actually doing a reasonable job of mopping up the mess after 14 years of ruination and told us how difficult it would be to turn around.
Secondly, as Steven Swinford reported in the Times, Burnham has failed to secure the services of Lord Jim O’Neill and now faces a backlash about his central devolution pillar, being told to train his focus on London rather than the provinces and Manchester. According to Lord O’Neil:
“You’ve got to focus on London … London is still as big as the next eight most important urban places put together. So if London were to continue showing trend-softening you can’t get the GDP numbers to rise … No doubt Cornwall and a lot of other places will moan. That’s going to be tricky for them politically, not least because Andy said we want to have growth in every postcode. He’s got to think about the reality and hard choices.”
Another headline in the Guardian appeared a few days ago that is a genuine and fundamental U-turn by Burnham on political funding.
This article from the Guardian tells us a great deal about the perilous position Burnham now finds himself in: that he can be manipulated by negative reporting. Alongside the palaver surrounding the early release of PC Andrew Harper’s killers, this governing by headlines approach is a disaster.
Doubling back on donations
By reversing his ferrets down the dark alleyway of political donations, the accusations of lobbying and dark political money raise their greasy heads again. While initially backing the plans to cap political donations at £500,000, and even going so far as to say that was too high, he’s now changed his mind after unions had a word in his easily-accessible ear.
In May, he said that his support for a £500,000 individual donations cap would “guard against the perception of any one party being unduly influenced or swayed by one person or organisation.” His U-turn has left the Labour Party open to accusations of lobbying again, something that Keir Starmer worked hard to remove – the acquiescence to the oil and gas lobby all but confirms it.
Burnham is being given an easy ride in the media so far, with the Times (Steven Swinford again) reporting Team Manchester’s entire policy programme for the forthcoming year, as well as the softly-softly tone in which he will take his first PMQs next week. Steven’s article details tone, content and most importantly, in my opinion, the lack of preparedness that Burnham has brought to the cabinet table, with any serious decision being kicked into the long grass of 2027 (perhaps even further).
‘When enacting a coup, one should come prepared to rule.’
Within this Times article is a well-briefed piece of the puzzle that many of us were waiting to find out about. Usually, this would be via an announcement, but it appears we now know for sure that Burnham is going to allow drilling for gas in the North Sea. According to the article:
“He will approve drilling for gas at Jackdaw, off the coast of Aberdeen in the North Sea. A visit to Aberdeen has been pencilled in to make an announcement.”
A step only designed to please the various oil and gas lobbies and to appease the right-wing press. There is no scientific or economic reason to allow this return to fossil fuel policy. This, for me, is a horrendous step backwards.
A final disappointment
The final piece of the frieze, as it were, on Team Burnham’s decision-making reversals was announced by the Financial Times a few days ago: a reversal of Burnham’s previous intent to return Greek sculptures from the British Museum to the Parthenon.
From the Daily Mail:
The Prime Minister had supported returning the sculptures, saying two years ago they should be shipped to Greece with ‘no strings attached.’ But in one of many U-turns since his return to Westminster, Mr Burnham said: “Ultimately it’s an issue for the British Museum.”
When we look at what I’ve laid out above, it’s difficult to imagine the media furore had this been laid at the feet of Keir Starmer, but Andy Burnham is being allowed the freedom to change his mind. A rare gift afforded to very few politicians, and even fewer on the supposed left. LBC have offered full-throated support from their punditry. Tom Swarbrick, one of its right-leaning presenters, has been positively gushing about Burnham’s malleability.
Where does this all leave us as a nation, though? Are we in safe hands, or can we expect two years of U-turns followed by a disastrous Labour loss at the election booths in 2029? Hard to say right now, but I am less and less optimistic about our Manchester overlords.
Comments? We want to hear them. Please write to editor@westenglandbylines.co.uk
National Inclusion Week
Bylines network has signed up for National Inclusion Week. Progress doesn’t happen in perfect conditions. Listen, adapt and take action
Build trust. Navigate change.
