So, how was it for you? - political sketch

Andy Burnham's marathon session in the House of Commons yesterday, and his performance at PMQs today, are a good start, but now he has to deliver.

Talk is cheap, as we all know, and there was certainly plenty of that yesterday as the new Prime Minister set out his stall to a packed House. In a prequel to today's PMQs Burnham gave his Statement, to which Kemi Badenoch, as Leader of the Opposition, responded. Try as she might - which wasn't very hard - she failed to land a blow on her new opponent, appearing to succumb to his irresistible charm and patent sincerity, ending up laughing along with him at her own expense. An exhausting three-and-a-half hours later (and, yes, for the record, I watched the entire session on Parliament.tv) a tired and emotional (in the literal rather than Private Eye sense) Burnham left the Chamber. He must have been feeling shattered but quietly satisfied as he headed for a well-deserved cuppa - or maybe something a little stronger.

He acquitted himself well in both sessions, I think most commentators would accept that, and dealt with the gruelling occasions with good humour, good grace - and amazing sang-froid. Where yesterday's session could be characterised as good-natured, today's PMQs was rather more robust and business-like but Burnham maintained his composure. In fact, he once again reminded me of his Spanish counterpart, Pedro Sánchez, in his cool, relaxed, relatable style, which amounts to so much more than the 'vibes' his detractors accuse him of. Yesterday may have had the feel of a school assembly on the first day back after the summer hols but today one could discern the style that will characterise Project Burnham. 

We certainly saw something of a resumption of the cut-and-thrust of adversarial Westminster politics which Burnham had hoped to avoid, but that was always going to be a tall order given that confrontational face-offs are designed into the layout of the Chamber itself. He may deprecate it but he proved himself more than equal to it when the need arose. I fear, though, he may come to regret ruling out a move towards PR in this Parliament in reply to a question from Lisa Smart (Lib Dem, Hazel Grove), seeming to favour including the issue in his manifesto for the next General Election and leaving it to voters to give him a mandate. That's all well and good, and no doubt very proper, but not necessarily prudent. If he doesn't go for it now he may not gain a majority at that election - indeed, he may not win it. Surely, as it seems increasingly popular with the PLP,  it would be more pragmatic to work to bring it in now while he enjoys the huge Parliamentary majority bequeathed him by his predecessor?

Talking of whom, Starmer chose yesterday to lob a spanner in the works for his successor by announcing his stepping down as an MP. If he meant to rain on Burnham's parade, however, it was a miscalculation on a par with so many others in his premiership - only succeeding in adding one final U-turn to his record having previously said he would stay on. Today, with Banquo's ghost exorcised, Burnham established his authority, leaving the memory of Starmer to fade away into that grey, twilit underworld of international shuttle diplomacy inhabited by other shades of Labour's past such as Tony Blair, occupying a sad Hades of hotel lobbies and airport VIP lounges, photo opportunities and cocktail receptions. In fact I doubt even Donald Trump will be desperate enough to welcome him to his Board (or is that Bored?) of Peace given his disobliging contrast of Starmer with Winston Churchill.

Of course, none of the problems Burnham faced yesterday have gone away, in fact they just got worse. As Kemi Badenoch gleefully reminded him, the bond markets did not react well to his performance yesterday, fearing too many spending commitments. UK debt costs have increased as a result meaning that the UK spends twice as much servicing government debt as it does on defence, and that's gotta hurt with an aspiration to spend 3% of GDP on the military. Badenoch accused him, sardonically, of being a "people-pleaser" who wanted to bring the welfare bill down by spending more money. That will prove a difficult criticism to refute but it's a dilemma for the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, John Healey, to resolve when he faces the music at his Budget on 28th October. Having resigned his previous job in Starmer's cabinet over defence spending targets he now has the unenviable task of squaring that self-same circle. Be careful what you wish for.

Burnham may be pondering that too but, as they say oop north, he's made his bed, now he mun lie in it.


Popular posts from this blog

Myth take

In an essay for the openDemocracy newsletter on the future of Ukraine, Aman Sethi discusses national.myths. As he puts it, "we are all shaped by our myths, but we needn’t be bound to them. We are all born into our respective national identities, but we can each choose to reinterpret what they mean to us". On the 50th anniversary of the death of the Spanish dictator, Francisco Franco, modern Spain is doing precisely that; re-examining its post-Franco settlement, with strong challenges emerging from the left to the prevailing narrative of a successful parliamentary democracy guaranteed by a constitutional monarchy - a myth if ever there was one. While the United Kingdom is clearly not experiencing the same kind of existential crisis facing Ukraine as a result of Russian aggression, or dealing with the troubled legacy of a forty-year fascist regime like Spain, it is nevertheless in the throes of a crisis of identity. It could be argued that this is merely the latest iteration of...
Read more

A hope in hell

Any self-respecting independent island nation ought to be able to secure its own borders, right? Well, patently not if that nation happens to be the UK under a clapped-out, morally bankrupt Conservative government. When you've just wilfully severed almost fifty years of co-operative links with your nearest continental neighbours and totally fucked up your immigration system, no wonder thousands of desperate migrants are willing to risk the dangerous Channel crossing in small boats from the French coast to gain access. They cannot and will not wait forever in unsafe and insanitary encampments,  within sight of the White Cliffs of Dover on a clear day, without chancing their luck. No wonder, either, that the French authorities for their part seem unable or unwilling to do much to prevent them. Short of blasting these boats out of the water (something I suspect many xenophobic Brexiteers, including Tory MPs, would enthusiastically welcome) the only realistic response from the UK is to...
Read more

Cruel to be kind?

I've just watched Joe Biden's televised valedictory address to the American people from the Oval Office officially announcing his decision to stand down as the Democratic Party's presidential candidate. It was a dignified and statesmanlike performance but it also showed quite clearly that the decision, whether voluntary or enforced, to stand down at the end of his term, was the right one. His voice was weak, he occasionally faltered, but he made it through to the end without further embarrassing mishap. However, it was quite clear that his physical strength, never exactly robust, is waning and his faculties may be impaired.  Whatever the reality, it was glaringly apparent that another four years in the White House would have been an impossibility for Biden. He looked frail and vulnerable, which is emphatically not the image a sitting US President needs to project to the world, much less when he is also going into an election as a Presidential candidate. Biden may go on to l...
Read more