Today, Burnham is part of the “soft left” of Labour —but what does that mean? (Picture: Andy BurnhamGM/X)
Andy Burnham got back into parliament by running against Keir Starmer. He is now trying to prove that he will govern differently to Starmer—but not too differently.
Burnham, the newly-elected Labour MP for Makerfield and would-be party leader, made his first major speech on Monday.
Where Starmer sounded like a neoliberal technocrat, Burnham leant into the language of Labourism.
He spoke at the People’s History Museum in the city. He talked of the Peterloo Massacre of 1819 and how working class people in the past had “changed a British state built not with them in mind”.
There were some policies alongside Labourite vibes. Burnham signalled that he would bring in more social democratic reforms than Starmer—but suggested it wouldn’t be immediate.
He promised the “biggest council-house building programme since the post war period” in “all parts of the country”. “If you don’t give people a good home, what chance do you have of giving them a good life,” he said.
There were promises of public control, if not ownership, of some services. “We will ensure all parts of Britain are able to take greater public control of essential services” such as energy and transport, he said.
Labour would introduce “ten-year plans to bring down costs of these essentials”.
But the section that did the heaviest lifting tried to manage people’s expectations. “Ours is a ten-year mission to raise people’s living standards,” he said. “I know people can’t wait forever for change.
“I heard on doorsteps in Makerfield how people need a bit extra now to help with rising costs.
“I will do my very best to deliver it. While not taking risks with the public finances, I will seek to give Britain some breathing space as soon as I can.”
This snag in the speech points to a much deeper set of problems that Burnham faces.
The British state—and the Labour Party—are struggling to adapt to a new global order.
The “rules-based international order”, which saw the US dominate the world through financial institutions and military alliances, is in crisis. As competition between states ramps up across the world, Donald Trump has shifted to a more open and predatory form of imperialism.
The “special relationship”—which saw Britain as a junior partner to the US—is under strain.
Neoliberalism, the dominant way of managing the global capitalist system for over 40 years, is breaking down.
The free market triumphalism is gone and ruling classes are looking to forms of “state capitalism” to help them compete internationally.
The Labour Party’s strategy under Starmer was to copy the “Bidenomics”. This saw the previous US administration under Joe Biden use state intervention in the economy to make US capitalism more competitive against China.
So chancellor Rachel Reeves pushed the idea of “securonomics”—using state intervention to boost growth and compete with China.
It was, at best, Bidenomics on the cheap. Economic growth has been sluggish for the past decade. And, if the Labour government wanted to boost growth, it would have to increase investment through boosting taxes or borrowing.
But it didn’t want to do that for fear of upsetting the rich and the financial markets—and instead pushed austerity mark 2.
Starmer still stuffed the Labour government with the ghosts of Blairism, but their neoliberal doctrines no longer fitted.
In the 2000s Tony Blair had encouraged a financial boom and used the tax revenues from growth to spend more on the NHS, schools and public services.
Today, the whole system is in crisis from economic stagnation to climate chaos and the threat of war.
That means big business demands Labour waters down the mildest of reforms that could put up barriers to profit-making.
And it means Labourism has little room for manoeuvre to deliver reforms without a confrontation with the profit system.
The outcome under Starmer was a poisonous mix of bowing to big business and lurches rightwards over immigration and trans+ rights.
What’s Burnham’s alternative? He too wants to use the state to make British capitalism more efficient and use the proceeds of growth to deliver some social democratic reforms.
“Good growth in every postcode and hope in every heart,” as he puts it.
Burnham called for a “stream-lined state with a clear purpose” and devolution to cities and regions. A new “Number 10 North” unit based in Manchester would be the “nerve centre of a rewired Britain” when he takes over.
But Burnham claims all that can be delivered without breaking from “the discipline of our fiscal rules”.
These self-imposed rules saw Starmer and Reeves push austerity 2.0—and Burnham’s not willing to liberate Labour from this neoliberal orthodoxy.
These contradictions mean a Burnham government won’t fundamentally break with Starmer.
Before he reinvented himself as a soft left regional mayor, Burnham was a Blairite health secretary in the 2000s. He’s bringing back a right wing figure from that period, appointing James Purnell as chief of staff.
Burnham has already made clear that he backs home secretary Shabana Mahmood’s plans to clamp down on immigration. And he has thrown trans+ people under the bus and backed the EHRC’s transphobic guidance. This means a Burnham government will not be a bulwark against the growth of Reform UK or Restore Britain.
Nor has he promised a break with Labour’s support for Israel’s genocide—which proved a key factor in Starmer’s demise.
But there will be a bounce for Burnham and his promises of reform will raise the expectations of many working class people for change.
The labour movement should ramp up pressure on Burnham to break with Starmer’s rotten legacy.
The only way to do that is relying on our own strength on the picket lines and streets to fight for change, not putting our faith in Labour to deliver it.
Hundreds attend anti-austerity summit hosted by Hackney council
Labour struggling to adapt to a new global order
Max and his colleagues were subjected to an Ice-style raid
Burnham faces the same economic bind as Starmer
