How Andy Burnham should approach governance

Jill Rutter considers how Andy Burnham should approach governance as he prepares to succeed Keir Starmer later this month.

Morgan McSweeney now admitted that Labor was not prepared for power in 2024.

They had, realistically, two years to plan – the period by which it was clear that Boris Johnson was vulnerable and that Labor could form the next government. Keir Starmer then “changed the Labor Party”. His goal was to win the elections. The policy was refracted in order not to hinder victory – and not to establish solid foundations for the government project. When there was a compromise between winning and governing, it was winning. It hasn’t helped that Keir Starmer seems to find it easier to focus on solving the immediate problem in front of him, rather than setting out a clear long-term vision.

Andy Burnham has weeks rather than years. He has the advantage of being able to avoid an election, but Keir Starmer appears to have decided to enjoy his summer vacation rather than give his usurper the time he wanted to plan.

He’s already made some big calls. Successive Prime Ministers have messed up the structure and people of No 10. Burnham has brought in a former close cabinet colleague to lead his No 10 with the appointment of James Purnell as chief of staff. It seems like a good start to have someone who will be able to speak with authority on behalf of the Prime Minister, who has led organisations, who knows him well enough to challenge him when he is wrong, and who will have credibility with Labor MPs. So far, so good.

We also know, in terms of structures, that he wants to make No. 10 a strong center capable of leading the government. This too was missing from Starmer’s liability number 10. He also appears to have persuaded Jonathan Powell to remain his national security adviser – a guarantee of continuity and a good way to compensate for Burnham’s lack of foreign and defense experience.

The most striking proposal is to base part of No 10 in Manchester – No 10 North. It could just be a gesture – but it could also mean a lot if Andy Burnham decides he’s going to live at home and work in Manchester a few days a week. The presence of the Prime Minister is essential to signal that this is real change rather than an artistic performance.

One of the questions will be how to decide how this will work in practice. Will it simply be the basis of the No. 10 team that will lead the economic and decentralization strategy? Or will private offices, policy units and communications teams have members permanently based in Manchester as well as London? This would provide new career options for civil servants who choose to settle in Manchester (not so much if you’re in Darlington, Bristol or Wolverhampton), allow Burnham to call on allies who have worked closely with him in the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and who have no desire to move south, and reduce the need for people to spend their lives on Avanti’s west coast.

Getting the right structures in place is important, but then Burnham has to decide what to do. This is not a change like we saw in 2024. Andy Burnham takes over midterm. The government already has Labor ministers who have been doing this work for almost a year or more. His legislative program was announced in the May King’s Speech. In many areas he announced ongoing reforms – people may not see change yet, but that is at least partly because in most cases change takes time.

The key choice for Burnham is continuity or change. He made it clear that he wanted changes in certain areas. There he must clearly explain what the aim of this change is, appoint people who he is convinced share this point of view and help them carry it out. Some of these major themes are already being felt: decentralization; construction of social housing; skills policy – ​​although in all these areas it must be absolutely clear about which areas decentralization and local choice prevail and which ones it wants to control centrally.

Governments are usually elected on the basis of detailed programs – which the civil service reviews before polling day. They may be picking up on cues from Burnham’s speeches now – but a few political speeches and a few sassy TikTtok videos don’t make it clear how Andy Burnham wants to move forward on the full range of issues prime ministers need to have their views on.

There are many other areas where change is being made, but which are potentially suffering from the blight because it is not clear what Burnham wants. An urgent task for the new Number 10 will therefore be to examine the portfolio of current policies and programs being pursued by the government and decide what to do.

The first option is to proceed according to the current schedule. The second is to speed up or slow down and possibly modify the reservations on certain aspects of the policy and make it reflect the priorities of the new government. The third, where the new government wants to do something very different, is to stop change in its tracks and ask for new ideas.

Similar principles apply to ministerial change. There will be new eye-catching nominations. But there are good reasons to value continuity as much as possible – a mistake Gordon Brown made when he arrived in 2007 and embarked on what looked like change for change’s sake. A mantra of change where necessary, continuity where possible would enable the Burnham Government to hit the ground running and begin to be able to highlight concrete achievements which we believe it will be able to communicate better than its predecessor.

He can then turn to the event that will define his mandate as prime minister, as was the case for Keir Starmer: his government’s first budget.

By Jill Ruttersenior fellow at the Institute for Government.