As Keir Starmer bid farewell to Downing Street, he gave his successor his “full and unequivocal support”, speaking of a Britain “stronger and fairer” than he inherited two years ago.
However, public opinion figures painted a less festive scene. According to a YouGov poll in April, only 15% of Britons were satisfied with the Labor Party’s record, compared to 68% who expressed dissatisfaction, including about half of the party’s voters in the 2024 elections.
Read also
list of 3 itemsend of list
After the resignation, a quick survey by the same organization concluded that the most common judgment of Starmer’s performance was that it was “poor” or “disastrous.”
Another political king has fallen, and a new succession game has begun in Westminster, and at its heart has emerged Andy Burnham, the former mayor of Greater Manchester, known in Britain as the “King of the North,” and the candidate – as Western newspapers say – to cross from the symbolism of the title to the threshold of rule in Downing Street.
The Washington Post says that Burnham, 56 years old, has become the most likely candidate to succeed Starmer in the leadership of the Labor Party, after the Prime Minister resigned just two years after a major election victory.
The newspaper adds that his rise appeared to be a given to analysts after former Health Minister Wes Streeting, the most prominent name proposed to compete with him, withdrew and announced his support for him.
The Washington Post noted a scene indicating the extent of anticipation, as television channel helicopters followed Burnham’s train journey to London, in an unusual display for a politician who had just returned to Parliament after winning a by-election in the Makerfield constituency in northern England.
According to the newspaper, a number of Labor MPs who are concerned about their seats see in Burnham something that has become rare within the party: an electoral hope. He won a seat in a pro-Brexit area, where the far-right Reform UK party led by Nigel Farage was expected to make an important breakthrough.
The New York Times presents Burnham as the political and personal opposite of Starmer. He is a direct, charismatic man who does not speak in polished Westminster, which makes him able to communicate smoothly with voters.
The newspaper quoted John McTernan, Tony Blair’s former advisor, as saying that Burnham appears “optimistic, happy, and enjoys being a politician,” in contrast to a number of prime ministers in recent years, including Starmer, who have not appeared to enjoy the position.
The newspaper says that Burnham’s supporters see him as an opportunity to restore the Labor Party’s relationship with voters, and block the way for the rising populist right.
However, according to the New York Times, his critics portray him as a “political chameleon” who will face the same economic restrictions that have exhausted Starmer’s government, along with an angry and impatient public.
The Independent quotes Burnham as saying after his victory in Makerfield, “We all know that politics (in Britain) is not going the way it should,” and that the country “is not where it should be.”
He added that that night “may be the turning point,” sending a sharp message to his party that this is “his last chance for change,” and that “there will be no second chance.”
Voice of the North
The newspaper quotes Burnham as saying in a recent interview that Britain has been “on the wrong path for 40 years.”
The Guardian says that Burnham’s image as a man of the people was strengthened during the Corona pandemic, when he had a public confrontation with Boris Johnson’s government over its management of the crisis in Greater Manchester.
The newspaper believes that his vociferous defense of his region, which economically outperformed large parts of the country, is what established the title of “King of the North” in political and media circulation.
The Guardian goes back to a moment that Burnham considers a turning point in his career. In 2009, during the commemoration of the twentieth anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster at Anfield, fans boycotted his speech, demanding justice for the victims.
The newspaper says that Burnham appeared confused and close to tears that day, before he later described that moment as the beginning of his “journey away from Westminster,” and the beginning of the cooling of his relationship with traditional politics in London.
The Independent sees that the core of Burnham’s project for Britain is based on what it calls “Manchesterism”, a vision that mixes devolution of powers to regions and returning some services to public control.
The newspaper explains that Manchester’s experience in the “B” transport network, which returned buses and trams to local management after extracting them from private companies, represents the most prominent example of this approach.
The Independent adds that Burnham calls for granting local leaders broader powers in financing and decision-making, as they are best able to understand the needs of their communities.
The newspaper quotes him as saying that “deindustrialization and privatization” have left areas like Makerfield without good jobs, and have left people unable to afford basic necessities.
According to the newspaper, Burnham proposes transferring this principle to sectors such as energy, water, housing, and transportation, while emphasizing adherence to financial rules, and not raising income tax, value-added tax, or national insurance, during the current parliamentary session.
Regarding the European file, the Independent says that he does not seek to return Britain to the European Union, despite his acknowledgment that Brexit harmed the country, justifying his position that Britain should not remain a prisoner of the same battles of the past.
But Western newspapers do not present Burnham as a free answer. The Washington Post says that his record remains mostly local, centered on transportation, housing, and economic development, and that as mayor he did not need to formulate detailed positions on foreign policy, defense, or national security.
The newspaper quotes John Tong, a professor of politics at the University of Liverpool, as saying that Burnham was “a very successful mayor of Greater Manchester,” but that the transition to prime minister is a “huge promotion,” similar to moving from a small stadium to the big stage.
Tong warns that Burnham’s rise does not necessarily mean Labor has recovered electorally, but he acknowledges that the man has a distinct advantage: “It’s hard not to like him.”
As for the New York Times, it quotes Robert Ford, a professor of politics at the University of Manchester, that as mayor, Burnham was accustomed to saying what was on his mind, but now he is receiving a harsh lesson in the necessity of weighing his words.
Ford adds that navigating the Downing Street storm is a completely different matter, as there will be “150 cases every day” on the Prime Minister’s desk, without the luxury of choosing battles or having a long time to think.
In this way, the Western press does not paint Burnham as a guaranteed savior, nor just a local politician who rose by chance, but rather presents him as a great bet for a tired party. He is a northern man who is good at speaking on behalf of the areas that have been narrowed by London’s centralization, and he has local experience that gave his project a practical aspect, but he is approaching power in a country that does not give its new leaders much time, and does not quickly forgive those who promise to turn discontent into a new beginning.
Source: Independent + Guardian + New York Times + The Washington Post
