Would the real Andy Burnham please stand up?

THE TYRES are looking rather soft, the wheels are unbalanced and some nuts are already coming loose. Soon the Andy Burnham behemoth will be swerving erratically from left to right and back again – in a vain attempt to stay in the middle of the road.

Is the newly promoted Formula 3 driver actually as good as his backers believe and say – or is it all bluster and bravado to get Starmer out and buy a little more time? Hopefully, some muse, a Burnham bounce might appear that could mean risking an early general election.

Aye right!

Just as likely, I say, is that being a better communicator is not enough, having more sensitive political antennae might make for better judgment and wiser decisions – but if the core offering is flawed or simply not the answer to the problems then no amount of good marketing can sell a dud.

Just where does Andy Burnham stand?

Is he a tax cutter or a tax hiker?

Will he devolve more power beyond Westminster in any meaningful way – or shall the biggest beneficiary be the EU, which is not a region or home nation but another country (or 27 countries, to be exact)?

The recipe for a Labour disaster is all there. Once the honeymoon is over, the gloss has worn off and the scrutiny begins, the details will begin to expose hypocrisy, double standards, incoherent policies and scandals.

The initial relief that Starmer is no longer prime minister has already passed and the right-of-centre mainstream media are already working up articles that ask more questions than before.

deciphering his leftist managerial jargon is like trying to nail a blancmange to a sheet of glass

Burnham has been very coy about saying what he really believes this time around in his latest role in Westminster. Previously he had been a supporter of Blair, Brown, Miliband and Corbyn; now he has to stand for what he actually believes – but deciphering his leftist managerial jargon is like trying to nail a blancmange to a sheet of glass.

Already we have had U-turns from Burnham. In fact we had them even before he became prime minister.

At the Makerfield by-election Burnham was rewriting his script as the campaign progressed – famously watering down his previous-era commitments to rejoining the EU in his lifetime and instead saying it was no longer a priority.

We had the talk of a council house revolution, with a building programme that would be a postwar record – but now Housing Secretary Angela Rayner is saying even the Starmer target of building 1.5m homes across both the private and public sectors by 2029 “will be a stretch”.

Then, as his anointment approached, we had the briefings about how the problem of the frozen income tax thresholds introduced by Sunak in 2021, then extended by Hunt and later by Reeves, had really got to him during the by-election and that he felt moved to act. Within two days, following reports of a Treasury briefing on the real state of the public finances, the chances of the freeze being lifted early were already being talked down, if not cancelled altogether.

We can also see that Burnham is being pulled to the left and right by his closest advisors. Miatta Fahnbulleh, now the new Secretary of Energy and Net Zero, and formerly CEO of the far-left New Economics Foundation, is noted for wishing to go harder, faster and deeper on almost every left-wing policy suggestion. Net Zero by 2050? Nah, she goes for Net Zero by 2040.

On the right, Burnham’s compass is Josh Simons, the MP who gave up the Makerfield seat and who is expected to be tasked with developing policy.

We can expect to see battles developing between what is called “left Burnhamism” and “right Burnhamism” with Burnham no doubt encouraging such creative tensions to come up with ideas for testing through focus groups and then flying kites and choosing what goes down best. If so, it will be Blairism writ large all over again.

When a prime minister has no core beliefs other than retaining power for himself first and his party second, both at the expense of what is right and what is in the country’s best interests, we shall have sclerotic short-termism that will drive investment and the wealthiest taxpayers away to warmer climes. It was already happening under Starmer – with record numbers of millionaires leaving the UK – and it will continue, and possibly accelerate, if Burnham is seen to be no better.

Journalists have been pouring over the social media posts of the new Chancellor, John Healey – a name that takes us right back to Labour’s inglorious seventies – and every other ministerial appointment in an attempt to obtain clues, or at least embarrass those responsible into backtracking. Healey had wanted War Bonds to help fund the Defence Investment Plan, but Rachel Reeves rejected the idea. Now we hear the Treasury has already ruled them out in case Healey asks for them again.

Problems, problems, problems.

Burnham faces especially the problems of building up expectations which then require new and greater funding – but there’s no money under the mattress. Raising taxes or borrowing more will make an edgy economy even riskier, possibly tipping Britain into a recession.

We don’t know how Burnham will respond – indeed, does he know himself? When we ask whether the real Andy Burnham will stand up, the only thing that is certain is that it will be a card-carrying Labour politician who supports Everton. Beyond that he looks like a chimera with no clear identity or convictions.

When you don’t know what you stand for, how can anyone else be expected to know either? It looks like Starmerism but with greater feeling – and that’s not going to be good enough.