Andy Burnham's first speech as Labour leader to the party conference has divided the press, with some commentators comparing his oratory favourably to Tony Blair while others attacked the radical nature of his policies.
Andrew Marr, the former BBC political editor and now the New Statesman's chief political commentator, said: "Rather to my surprise, I have to report Andy Burnham is at least as good a platform speaker" as Blair. "Perhaps better." Piers Morgan, the former News of the World editor, called the speech "one of the best, and most powerfully delivered, by a British politician in a very long time".
Praise from political commentators
Tim Shipman, political editor of the Spectator, concluded the speech was sub-Blair but "as good as anything we've seen since". He wrote: "I've been attending party conferences since 2001 and in that time I've heard about 70 leaders' speeches from all the parties. This was one of the most important and defining – I expect it will remain among the half-dozen most memorable."
Patrick Maguire, the Times's chronicler of Labour's inner workings, said: "The Labour party will talk about this speech for years and it will be remembered, as so few speeches are, as a formative, watershed moment in the history of this young century, for better or worse."
Quentin Letts, the Mail's sketch writer, was less impressed, saying the speech was so saccharine in its plea for unity that "I got diabetic twinges".
Right-wing media attacks
The Daily Mail's editorial said the "PM's performance was slick, oozing everyman charm", but its front page described the "triple shock" of Burnham's pension changes, care plans and Brexit rethink. The Mail regarded the speech as the "most leftwing speech by a PM since [the] 1970s", while the Telegraph said it was a "road back to a failed past".
The Sun labelled the speech the "locky horror show", a reference to Burnham's pledge to end the pensions triple lock. It said "The British vote system 'rigged'" and "Government to seize private homes", referring to Burnham's plan to remove homes from bad landlords. Trevor Kavanagh, the Sun's veteran political commentator, described the address as "the most divisive speech I've heard from any prime minister" and called Burnham's emotional reference to his late father "a blatant pitch for sympathy".
The Sun's editorial column lamented Burnham's lack of action on cutting the "ballooning welfare bill". The Daily Express's front-page headline decried the speech as a "crying shame for our nation".
Questions over funding and vision
The Mail's editorial column asked "Who pays for PM's New Jerusalem", suggesting the speech would have pleased Labour supporters in the hall but concerned the general voter. It also criticised Burnham's predecessor, Keir Starmer, calling him "a strong candidate for worst public speaker in political history".
Shipman cited "room for improvement" in the speech's content, pointing to potential flaws in the national care service plan and limited early savings from ditching the pensions triple lock. He argued Burnham had "no plan for growth" and concluded the speech amounted to "the most partisan leftwing set of priorities we have seen since the days of Harold Wilson".
The Times's Maguire concluded: "There will be a hell of a row before we know whether it's an epoch-defining Thatcherism of the left or Truss with charisma. But for the first time in recent history, the leader of the Labour party wants that argument and is making his own."
The Times's editorial column said: "Mr Burnham's speech was in some ways a curious throwback. Labour is becoming more middle class by the year, in composition and support, yet he imagines it as a vehicle dedicated to the working class of his memory. What exactly are wealth creators supposed to make of this charming man?"
