The thoughts I shared after I interviewed Andy Burnham recently may be worth repeating.
The first observation was how much better a communicator he is than almost everyone in UK politics right now; he deals with hard questions with genuine empathy, and has a rare ability to change what people think of him in a single encounter.
Secondly, devolution is the only hopeful political movement in politics, and that’s on him. He acknowledges that in doing so he stands on the shoulders of the giants that went before him, Sir Howard Bernstein, Sir Richard Leese, and never misses an opportunity to acknowledge the cadre of high quality officers and political leaders (of all parties) that back him up.
Thirdly, I think he’s a people pleaser. As he bounces from packed room to packed room, stopping for selfies and charming everyone on his way, he seems happy, proud, empowered and determined. The King of the North is in his pomp.
The first two observations are what self-evidently drives the constant speculation that only he could lead Labour to an election victory as Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves lurch from crisis to crisis.
The third point is why I really wish he’d put it all to bed and say he’s not interested in returning to Westminster.
Were he to make a move, he clearly wouldn’t do so as the backbench MP for Gorton and Denton, or wherever else, if he’s barred from standing. He would then be subjected to the kind of relentless sniping from a deranged national media, and loons on social media, that would make the abuse that his whole family got during the anti-Clean Air Zone campaign seem like a bit of banter at the match.
He pointed to a number of projects – Carrington, Atom Valley, the MBacc skills revolution – that could genuinely make Greater Manchester’s next economic growth spurt the most exciting decade since the Victorian era.
Yet there are still immense local challenges – too much crime, not enough good affordable housing, and an opportunity to lever in ever better jobs and technologies.
Much of the change that the whole country needs – and I don’t depart much from his analysis – can be influenced more effectively from here, than it ever could be from there.
So I said then, “don’t do it, Andy. Just don’t”.
PS
My MSc academic thesis about his first term was about how his “narratives” drove the “convening networks” to achieve what he could within the limited constraints of the devolution settlement.
“Business friendly socialism” or “Manchesterism” he has more latterly called it as the solution to “the four horsemen of Britain’s apocalypse: deregulation, privatisation, austerity and Brexit.”
Few people have been willing to say that, shamefully, yet here we are. Now that the game is on I think we’re going to see a very different Andy Burnham.
