Just 24 hours ago, Keir Starmer was still Prime Minister, Rachel Reeves was still Chancellor and Wes Streeting was still in the political wilderness of the backbenches. A far from idyllic situation, but a calm one nonetheless.
Fast forward to today, however, and Andy Burnham has seized the reins of Number 10. Within his first few hours of possessing this new power, he has embarked on a purge of the few remaining Starmerites.
It almost made me shed a tear. In a matter of hours, Reeves, Lammy and others were sacked from the Cabinet, paving the way for a sort of Mancunian mafia to take control. ‘Cosa Nostra’ the Cabinet whispers together, in a thick northern accent, as they sit down for their first meeting.
We have seen Ed Miliband promoted to Foreign Secretary, John Healey moved into the Treasury and a whole host of other appointments which continued well into the late hours of the night. But to properly understand the significance of what we just witnessed, it is important to first look at where Burnham began the day’s proceedings.
Andy Burnham has long boasted about how he wishes to do politics “differently.” His first speech as Prime Minister yesterday was emblematic of exactly that. Standing in Downing Street, without a lectern nor notes, he addressed the crowd of cameras and microphones, making it clear that “people at home are fed up of politics” and that “we have not been good enough, and we need to be better.”
The speech was, at the very least, moving. Whatever disagreements people have over how he intends to move the country forward, it is difficult to deny that he actually wants to move it forward.
He made a number of remarks which pointed directly to different ministerial briefs. He pledged to, for instance, “build more council homes,” a policy which will largely fall under the remit of the new Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Angela Rayner.
Burnham also discussed the need to “meet our fiscal rules, and to honour our commitments on defence to our international partners,” a clear nod to both those taking up roles in the Treasury and the MOD.
Yet, what I found of most interest in Burnham’s speech was his comment about taking the country forward. “Later this year,” he said, “I will bring forward a new plan for Britain, a 10-year plan, laying out a path from where we are now to where I believe we all want Britain to be.”
Now, call me paranoid but Burnham faces a general election in three years. A 10-year plan only makes sense if he intends to go to the country early and seek a renewed mandate. As I have written before, that is not an entirely unrealistic prospect. Burnham is already experiencing a bounce in the polls, putting him on equal footing with Reform UK, and several MPs have told me they believe he could pull the trigger early to catch everyone off guard. Read against that backdrop, the line about a 10-year plan looks less like an accident and more like a warning for everyone to get their house in order.
Whilst he touched on a handful of other topics, that was very much the substance of the speech. A handful of vague policy announcements coupled with, in true Burnham fashion, no account of how they will be carried out. He went on to say that he will “soon go through that door behind me and issue my first instruction: to end rough sleeping in our country.” Again, he did not say how, and I would wager that this is a problem which is symptomatic of Burnham’s platform more generally.
The speech was civil enough, if indeed a tad dull. What came next, however, was not.
As the clock ticked forward, Burnham began his purge. Starmerites were dismissed one by one. For a man who proclaims he wants to end factionalism within the Labour Party, he has an odd way of showing it.
It began with Steve Reed, then Peter Kyle. David Lammy followed soon after, as did Rachel Reeves. The senior figures of Starmer’s premiership were removed in turn as the King of the North took control of his Cabinet. Whilst I could dedicate thousands of words to examining and analysing each individual appointment, I will focus on what I deem to be the most notable and important ones.
The decision which has been best received is the appointment of John Healey as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Seen by many as a compromise candidate between the more radical Ed Miliband and the centrist Shabana Mahmood, Healey serves a useful purpose in reassuring markets that there will be no craze-induced spending spree.
I say this because one of the criticisms often levied against Burnham is his reckless attitude towards the bond market. Having previously labelled the UK as being “in hock to the bond markets,” Burnham has seemingly sought to rebrand himself. Both his and Healey’s reiteration of commitment to the fiscal rules outlined in the 2024 manifesto looks like a deliberate attempt to offset those anxieties.
The MPs I have spoken to seem content with Healey’s appointment as well. One Shadow Cabinet member called him the “least worst” option. Others have gone further, calling it a ”smart move given that Healey earned plaudits for resigning as Defence Secretary”, and that this confirms defence is now a “top priority” for him. Another Shadow Cabinet member argued that if neither Healey nor Burnham use this as a platform to bolster the defence budget, it will “look ridiculous.” “I don’t see how he can’t now make defence the priority,” another adds.
With so much attention on defence, Burnham’s decision to bring his would-be leadership contender Wes Streeting back into the fold cuts two ways. One reading is that of punishment. Handing him a brief which Al Carns once labelled as a “poisoned chalice” is a good way of making Streeting’s life difficult.
The other reading – perhaps one which is guided by naive optimism if nothing else – is promotion. If Streeting agreed to back Burnham as part of some informal gentleman’s agreement, he would have needed, at minimum, a step up from Health Secretary. Foreign Secretary never suited him, and Chancellor was never really on the table, so Defence is not the illogical move it first appears. Given that Healey’s appointment signals a defence spending boost regardless, Streeting may not have done badly out of it.
The fact that Number 10 offered the Chancellor role to Reeves first also serves a purpose. Offering a steadfast Starmer ally a top job she was always going to reject lets Burnham’s team present themselves as extending an olive branch that Reeves is the one rejecting. At a time when Burnham is keen to minimise factionalist fighting within the party, the move could be a very clever tactical decision. “It is an old trick” one MP tells me.
Keeping Mahmood in place makes sense as well. Burnham knows he has to get immigration numbers down, and Mahmood is doing just that. Moving her would have broken a winning formula. She also serves the added benefit of balancing the Great Offices of State against Miliband. Whilst the now Foreign Secretary pulls the four of them greatly to the left, Mahmood’s Blue Labour credentials pull them back in the other direction, acting as a sort of political counterweight.
Speaking of Miliband, moving him to the Foreign Office is the more unusual call. The convention is to send a political rival there precisely to remove any prospect of a leadership challenge while they are on the other side of the world. Whether Burnham sees Miliband as that kind of threat remains to be seen, but the decision is worth watching nonetheless.
With such a significant shake up, it is clear that what we have witnessed is not a reshuffle per se but a rebranding. An ‘out with the old’ type of approach. With such a significant change of personnel, it makes one wonder how the Opposition will react.
As I have argued before, a shake up of this magnitude would provide Kemi with the perfect opportunity to reshuffle her Shadow Cabinet without losing much in the way of political capital. Whether she responds to this change remains to be seen – but I would wager that if you needed an excuse to pull the trigger and shift things around, you have the perfect one right now.
Indeed, what we have witnessed over the past 24 hours and what we will continue to witness as the days go on is something which carries immense political weight. There will be more changes, and there will be policy announcements, and ConservativeHome will be there to discuss all of it. As our editor takes a well-deserved holiday for the next two weeks, readers will be getting the majority of the ToryDiaries from me as I try, along with everyone else in Westminster, to make sense of the early days of Burnham’s premiership – and of the man himself.