Thus far, Andy Burnham has governed on the principle of ‘good vibes only’, seeing his party back into first place in the polls on the basis of empty optimism alone. Whilst the new Prime Minister might be vacuous, his lead brittle under the strain of global instability, his opposition should nevertheless seize this moment as an opportunity for some sober realism. The conditions which saw Labour reduced from its 2024 landslide to its nadir two years later are likely impossible to replicate: on the one hand, a left more fractured than the right (driven by a Labour Party which refused to decide whether it wished to govern from the centre or the left), and on the other a unique advantage in voter enthusiasm (driven by the excitement of Reform as a new party and the utter incapacity of Starmer to inspire… anything).
This backdrop coloured every major challenge for Starmer’s government: internationally, as regards Gaza and the evolving relationship with Trump’s United States; and domestically, especially when it came to the attempts to push welfare reforms through a Parliament filled with novice MPs that denied their necessity. In the aftermath of Southport, in the face of unprecedented hostility to immigration, that inexperience drove a further wedge between the government and the Parliamentary Party as Morgan McSweeney fought to maintain Labour’s status as a national party, initiating a Cummings-esque ‘delivery focus’ whilst Rachel Reeves struggled to control public spending. The party’s rejection of proposals to means test the winter fuel allowance confirmed what had already become clear: the Starmer government had lost the trust of its MPs within months of being elected, and was doomed from there on out.
Damaging as this period was for Labour, the core lesson was learned: for the party to successfully push through uncomfortable but necessary reforms whilst maintaining internal cohesion, only a softly-softly ‘comms first’ approach would do. This lesson has been thoroughly internalised by the Burnham team, informing the can-kicking strategy we have seen since their entry into Number 10 this July. It has not been without its successes. So far, Burnham has managed to secure (albeit minor) reforms to the triple lock, justified as necessary to fund social care — an austerity measure Starmer would surely have been unable to push through — without generating significant opposition on the backbenches or among voters.
Underwriting all of this is the fact that the leading portion of the 2024 electorate who voted for Starmer simply wanted the noise of politics to go away for a while after the chaotic years of the last Tory government. Sir Keir was instead arrested by reality, and his maladroit sense of public duty combined with his total lack of imagination led his government to fumble blindly at structural reforms it was never ultimately willing to deliver but which nevertheless generated just as much controversy as those of its predecessor. In this sense, this bovine portion of the electorate has truly found their avatar in Andy Burnham. Much as we might find his fatuousness repellent, its fitness in the current selective environment should not be denied.
One of the first challenges to Burnham’s ‘just ignore it’ approach to problem solving will emerge later this week as John Healey announces his first budget: the Treasury’s continuing demands for welfare reform.
