Burnham — Boost, Bust or Bluster?
And Buses. And The Smiths.
As we approach the end of Andy Burnham’s first week as our country’s Prime Minister, I thought it only fair to make a load of sweeping generalisations and some woolly predictions about his forthcoming tenure at the helm of the good ship No.10 [north/south].
Not really … but I do have some thoughts.
As the title suggests, I find myself in a mental, three-way tug-o-war; it’s clearly far too early to form any meaningful commentary on his administration, but I felt left out — time to make some vague judgements and extrapolate like the big boys do!
Perhaps the most sensible starting point would be his cabinet and governmental appointments — this actually does offer us up a smidge of an inkling of where he might be taking things.
But let’s park that particular bus for a moment and deal with the most pressing matter at hand — the vibes. Andy Burnham has been widely labelled as a vibes-based politician — I’ve heard the word vibes used across the media far more often this week than I’d want, outside of a Californian surf commune. Does he radiate good vibes?
Perhaps it’s the softly spoken northern lilt, perchance a black t-shirt or two, maybe a Smiths reference too many, but These Things Take Time1 to fathom. Does his soft northern lilt resonate more than that of Keir Starmer’s slightly nasal monotone output? Regardless, he is being afforded a far more welcoming introduction to his assignment than Starmer did. The vibes, man. ✌️
The media angle is an interesting one, and we’ll circle back to that shortly, but let’s take a look at his cabinet; the runners and riders are in, so it’s fair that we examine their varied and interesting positions.
We’ll start with the great offices of state and work our way down, omitting any that might feel slightly uninteresting or uninspired.
Chancellor of the Exchequer — John Healy
This appointment came from slightly left of field and took most commentators by surprise … the prevailing winds had foretold of Shabana Mahmood in the treasury role. Healy, for my money, is a safe pair of governmental hands although lacks experience within the economic sector; he previously held a junior ministerial role as Economic Secretary to the Treasury in the early 2000s which will clearly help.
A long-term Labour stalwart, serving under Brown, Corbyn, Starmer and now Burnham, Healy has little controversy but is accused of allowing the government to collude with Israel in allowing RAF spy planes to recce Gaza and relay information to the Israeli government, while Defence Secretary.
Foreign Secretary — Ed Miliband
The most polarising appointment from the early runners is Ed Miliband as Foreign Secretary; Donald Trump’s team already raising their concerns about the man who was so vociferous about his green agenda previously. Wait until they meet Wes!
Mirroring his brother before him, Ed has now taken the mantle at the Foreign Office, but in a time that is arguably far more fought with danger and Trump shaped pitfalls. Potentially the most turbulent era in post-war politics is upon us with Ukraine, Iran and myriad conflicts in Africa, Miliband has his work set out for him. For what it’s worth, I’ve always rated Ed Miliband as an excellent politician and speaker, so I rank this as an excellent appointment.
Home Secretary — Shabana Mahmood
The person most talked about in the lead up to the cabinet announcements, Mahmood, retains her role at the Home Office. She has been ruthlessly efficient in this position, overseeing a huge drop in immigration figures, both regular and irregular. Many question her hardline approach, myself included, but she was put there to make headlines that counter Reform UK’s incessant whining — she’s certainly managed that. A move away would have been counterproductive.
Stop Me if You Think You’ve Heard This One Before2, but the top jobs have been allocated to top MPs in the Labour Party with very little controversy.
So far, so good. Don’t Panic3, I won’t be listing all 23 cabinet members so we’ll move on quickly now, and in my opinion, his worst appointment.
Defence Secretary — Wes Streeting
I’m entirely unclear if there is any political question to which the correct answer is Wes Streeting. The man who singularly failed to deliver a negotiated settlement with junior doctors in his almost tow year roles as Health Secretary — a settlement that was reached two weeks after his resignation by James Murray. From inside sources at the BMA, Streeting was touted as immovable and difficult, backed up by his often tetchy media responses when asked about the unimpressed medics.
Streeting may turn out to be an inspired choice and able to wrap Pete Hegseth around his little finger, and in which case, I will update the record and deliver an apology to the House, but I’m fairly certain that he’s unsuited for such a high-profile role.
There are many and varied reports about Streeting’s ties to private medical providers, but it appears he has, tenuous but very real, links to defence contractors as well. A conflict of interests or a paid for position? Let’s wait and see.
Now for the two women appointed, that are giving the right-wing media sleepless nights and causing the headlines to Oscillate Wildly4 between the two — Louise Haigh and Angela Rayner.
Both women resigned from Keir Starmer’s cabinet after revelations surfaced about events in their past, but Andy Burnham is overlooking those transgressions for, in his mind, two powerful allies in cabinet.
Rayner’s housing faux-pas is well documented, and although she was found not to be guilty of underpaying her stamp duty on a complicated house sale, there was an inadvertent error, and she repaid the shortfall of £40,000. Standards Commissioner Sir Laurie Magnus found:
‘Rayner had acted with integrity and intended to pay the correct tax, but had nevertheless failed to meet the “highest possible standards” expected of ministers. He therefore found a breach of the Ministerial Code, prompting her resignation in September 2025.’
Her appointment back to the same position she previously held shows True Faith5 by Burnham in his Housing Secretary.
Louise Haigh has been embedded with Team Burnham for some time and, according to reports, was instrumental, alongside Lucy Powell, in the takeover bid that has been a year in the making. Haigh has been duly rewarded with one of the highest offices in government, making her effectively Burnham’s senior coordinating minister and political deputy.
The controversy here lies in the discovery last year that Haigh had a fraud conviction from 2014. She pleaded guilty to fraud by false representation after reporting that her work BlackBerry had been stolen. The charge stated that this caused Aviva to provide her with a newer iPhone and conduct an investigation. She received a 12-month conditional discharge, a £100 fine and costs.
When this became public knowledge in 2024, Haigh resigned from her position as Transport Secretary.
The real problem here is the optics of giving one of the government’s most powerful integrity-and-coordination roles to someone with a fraud conviction. While she had been very open and disclosed her conviction to Starmer before accepting her previous role, it allows the press to pry around the seams of Burnham’s integrity.
Perhaps we’re getting bogged down in the weeds of the personnel — there are some good appointments — Johnathan Reynolds and some questionable retentions — Lisa Nandy, but overall, I see very little difference in the way Starmer set out his vision in 2024, borne out by the fact that 16 of Burnham’s cabinet also served in Keir Starmer’s. A deliberate choice I’m sure — drifting from the manifesto and Starmer’s vision that won a historic mandate would only further calls for a General Election, something the country is probably not too keen on overall.
I’m writing this on Thursday 23rd July, and the pattern of the week seems to be a 6am press release from the Burnham camp to announce new policy. So far, we’ve had bus fares capped at £2, scrapping VAT on energy bills and today, the removal of business rates for pubs, clubs and live music venues.
Three very positive impact statements designed to boost the public mood before a long, tiring summer of financial jiggery-pokery. The sole aim, to create a budget that will make a significant impact on the cost of living whilst not tanking the bond markets and enacting Liz Truss 2 — Big Mouth Strikes Again6.
Unfortunately for Team Burnham, they have not been paying attention to the recent behaviour of our media and have already seen their boosterism policies slightly dismantled.
Martin Lewis helpfully pointed out that by the time of the October price cap rise, the saving of £40 presented by Burnham, will be annihilated.
His bus fare cap is great for a city like Manchester but doesn’t have any impact at all in the wider country, whereby most folk use their private cars — also what about the extortion that is train fares?
And today’s headline of a £1,000 saving per year to pubs has been met with industry derision and, in actual fact, was an existing policy under Rachel Reeve’s financial aid measures.
Not so much This Charming Man7, as You Just Haven't Earned It Yet, Baby8.
And so to the overarching question — has Andy Burnham started well? The media seem to like him, he’s been afforded the benefit of the doubt so far in most circles although as the week has gone on, I have seen more critical remarks and the prying and probing has begun. Starmer’s quick fire resignation startled the Burnham camp and left them slightly on the back foot but, with the benefit of a friendlier media landscape, he may well be able to achieve some laudable goals.
He has arrived positively with a message of hope and a vision for a united country that has gone down well with the right-leaning press as well as those in the centre-left. A good start.
I’ll tie this up with my concerns, however, as Money Changes Everything9. John Healy is going to have to move heaven and earth to find the billions required for Project Manchester, and perhaps he’s got a master stroke up his sleeve, but I remain sceptical. Rachel Reeves was much maligned but steadied the economy after fourteen years of catastrophic ruination and was removed mid-term.
Are we about to see an entirely new form of governance because that’s what may be required? Team Burnham have touted a rewiring of the nation, but, Stop Me If You’ve Heard This One Before10 — can he achieve those objectives? Again, my scepticism rules my head. Time will tell.
I want to say a huge thank you to all of my supporters across all platforms. Your support is unbelievable and truly helps me to keep going with my work. I appreciate the pants off of every last one of you. 😍
If you have made it to this point, well done — this has been a long old slog. Thank you for reading, I sincerely appreciate it.
I don’t get paid for this stuff, so I have a couple of ways you can help out and support my work and research if you value my honesty and work. Firstly, you can subscribe to my Substack here.
Free or paid is spectacular and you’ll never miss an article. Or you can hit me up on Ko-fi for a donation or tip to help me with my research and keep me writing.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or if you think you may have a story. I’m on 𝕏 @donmcgowan or you can drop me an email, donmcgowan@pm.me or contact me in confidence on Signal. Thank you so much for reading.
The Smiths — Hatful of Hollow [1984]
The Smiths — Strangeways, Here We Come [1987]
The Smiths — Non-album single [1986]
The Smiths — The World Won't Listen [1985]
New Order — Substance [1987]
The Smiths — The Queen is Dead [1986]
The Smiths — Hatful of Hollow [1983]
The Smiths — The World Won't Listen [1987]
The Smiths — The World Won't Listen [1986]
The Smiths — Strangeways, Here We Come [1987]
Thank you for this measured analysis Don. I believe that Burnham has made a serious error be appointing Healey and Streeting and re-appointing Mahmood - I hold no brief for Starmer but these appointments smack of rewarding people purely for their disloyalty which in turn was driven by their personal political ambitions. I also regard the offences by Haigh and Rayner to be utterly trivial when compared to the out and out corruption that was committed by Tories under Johnson, especially during Covid.