OUT WITH THE OLD
The departure of Keir Starmer as Prime Minister is a cause for celebration as finally even his once fawning supporters now recognise his unsuitability for the job of PM. From his resignation speech he does not recognise that unsuitability himself as he resolutely recounted his achievements: that lack of self-awareness doomed him from the start, unable to assess that his capabilities and limitations were a mismatch with the requirements of good leadership at the highest level.
His replacement will be Andy Burnham, newly elected as a member of Parliament in order to be the favourite for new PM, and unchallenged by any other MP. That lack of challenge now perhaps reinforces the lack of talent on the Labour benches which may explain how Starmer got there in the first place.
KING’S NEW CLOTHES
It is hard to assess Andy Burnham’s suitability for the task. Few people seem able to explain his rooted philosophies and principles. Does it however sometimes make a PM or any Minister more credible if they have worked hard in a job in the private world of work, perhaps achieved something and perhaps gained a level of understanding of how commerce functions and markets work? Was Starmer’s cocooned life as a human rights lawyer and then as a civil servant, never having had to even deal with business let alone manage it, an explanation for his shortcomings? It may prove very relevant that Andy Burnham has never worked in a serious job outside of politics. Yet Emily Thornbury, a supporter, describes that as a great merit, meaning that he, unlike Starmer, understands how politics work. Does that equip him to be a good PM?
It is a platitude to say that being a mayor of a medium sized City, Manchester, has no similarity with being Prime Minister. Commentators and those with experience of Andy Burnham describe him in various terms from being a man uninterested in detail, a flip-flopper, an egoist to a man with real popular appeal, amiable, good in front of the camera and audience. His performance as Mayor is on balance mixed, having wasted lots of money but also sorted out the bus service with subsidies.A picture published by newspapers of his selfie looking happy on his Parliamentary inauguration with a multitude of seemingly adoring labour MPs behind him may reflect his charismatic appeal to his party; but it could also reflect the narcissistic element behind so many selfies, as well as a King’s New Clothes culture convenient for now; after all anyone who at least acquiesces in being called “King of the North” may have delusions of grandeur. It does seem however that, given he replaces a man regarded as hopeless as PM, for many he embodies hope that better things are to come.
THE VISION OF BURNHAM
In his 29 June speech to introduce his vision, he summarised his big change in approach as “Manchesterism”, the answer to transform UK governance. The ingredients are not new, such as teamwork, involving all elements of communities working in the same direction to a common end, all backed by devolution of power to councils and mayors, with Whitehall and Westminster collaborative partners, bottom-up change not top down. Plus, a Number 10 of the North in Manchester to drive progress. He evidently considers that it was his wisdom which transformed Manchester.
His commitment to helping those regions which lag behind to improve themselves and so benefit the whole country is laudable. Is this new culture a combination of Boris Johnson’s levelling up and David Cameron’s big society, which neither delivered on? He did not say how he would deliver on the big issues of the day, or finance anything, as he is still working out his plans. Those issues, like delivering quickly a defence investment to make the UK safe, are urgent and urgent solutions are required. The nation needs to give him a chance to show substance and a courage and thoughtfulness to really grapple with hard problems, not driven by dogma.
CREAKING CONSTITUTION
With the Conservatives having changed their leader five times in nearly as many years, our electoral system must be called into question. With Starmer being replaced after two years only, having been elected promising change, the “revolving door” of 10 Downing Street perhaps reflects an electorate with depressingly short term and selfish attitudes, and a media which is about today’s news and personal tittle tattle or scandal, not longer-term strategy and realistic seriousness.
In General Elections the British people simply vote for a Member of Parliament to represent them, backed by their political party principles and promises. There is no election of the Prime Minister who is chosen by the party concerned as their leader: and that person they are free to change whenever they like. Yet electioneering focuses more on the identity of the possible PM, not being voted on, than perhaps anything else. And a first past the post system produces in this current case a government with a vast majority actually supported by only some 20% of the electorate. Should the UK be considering an election specifically for a Prime Minister and separate elections for Parliament, closer to the U.S. system?
And in the dethroning of Starmer and perhaps the coronation of Andy Burnham, the strategic imperatives which are the people’s interests barely appear in the discussion: Starmer says he is dethroned as his party think he might lose the next election and Burnham might win it. Could the Labour MPs be more concerned with losing their jobs than delivery of prosperity for the UK, or at least its working people they purport to prioritise? After all, are many of them capable of earning more than their near £100,000 basic salary plus nice expenses if they had to find jobs in the private sector?
WE CAN ONLY HOPE
Whatever really motivates the Parliamentary Labour Party, the country can only give Andy Burnham a chance to prove his love of country and take the tough decisions, which Starmer boasts of having taken but without doing so. He has explained how decentralisation of government and a Number 10 of the North are the essential focus of his approach. He needs however to set out his stall of real actions so that people understand not just his direction of travel and where we are supposed to follow, but how he will achieve his laudable promise of “growth in every postcode” as well as fix the catalogue of necessities such as the excessive welfare bill, worklessness and making the UK safe.Let’s hope he understands that growth will come from the private sector not big state. He must show, not just say, he is not only about the North of England, but cares for the whole nation and not just working people. Will he say one thing and like a Starmer clone do another? Will he prove to be the Ace in the Labour pack, or will this so-called King prove to be yet another Joker?
It’s hard not to be sceptical of his vision when reality bites. We must nevertheless live in hope.
Leave a Reply