Political journalist Aaron Newbury has lambasted Andy Burnham's recent speech in Manchester, describing the incoming Prime Minister as "completely out of his depth" and "breathtakingly naïve." Writing for Express.co.uk, Newbury expressed frustration at the lack of substance in Burnham's address, which he said left journalists forced to "glean whatever kernels of knowledge as to his wishes from tea leaves and tarot cards."
Empty Rhetoric and Avoidance of Questions
Newbury noted that Burnham refused to take questions after his speech, with reporters sent to the back of the room away from the stage. This behaviour, Newbury argued, is unacceptable for a man who lacks a mandate and refuses to clarify his plans for the country. The journalist recalled Burnham's previous form of avoiding questions, including when asked about betraying the Brexit referendum. The speech itself was described as "little more than a self-absorbed diatribe appealing to everyone to just be a bit more like him."
Vague Promises and Soundbites
According to Newbury, Burnham's speech contained no concrete proclamations about the cost of his pledges for "good growth in every postcode" or putting "place" first. Instead, it was filled with empty platitudes such as a country "lifted back up" by changing how politics is done and handing more power to metropolitan mayors. Newbury criticised this as "top-down socialism with a smile" and argued that devolution does not shrink the state but relocates power rather than dispersing it.
Unaddressed National Problems
Newbury highlighted the serious problems facing the UK, including eroding law and order, a growing state with a shrinking workforce, an energy crisis, poverty, conflicts abroad, over a million young people out of work, unaffordable housing, and child poverty. He argued that these issues cannot be fixed with slogans or a second postcode for the person in charge. Burnham's plan, he concluded, was a "hodge-podge of pleasant noise" that fails to address the structural problems the country faces.
Mayor vs. Prime Minister
The journalist emphasised that being a mayor is fundamentally different from being Prime Minister. A mayor has limited revenue-raising powers and does not need to compete with national departments, while a Prime Minister must make trade-offs. Newbury argued that nothing in Burnham's speech suggested he had reckoned with this reality. He also criticised the display of a jacket Burnham once wore in a museum case near the venue, mocking the idea of treating it as a relic.
Newbury concluded that Burnham's myopic focus on the wrong things will cause harm to the country, and that we may be bored with him already but the damage he could do will be hard to ignore.
