Suddenly the British right feels a political chill. It’s getting cold in Andy Burnham’s shadow. The Tories and Reform UK had it easy when Keir Starmer was self-destructing, but a new PM with ideas exposes how vacant the opposition has become.
Badenoch invokes the 1970s
Kemi Badenoch, born in 1980, has no personal memory of the 1970s. Yet in a speech last week, the Conservative leader accused the new prime minister of pining for “endless strikes, rubbish not being collected, bodies not being buried, inflation at 25% and a chancellor going cap-in-hand to the IMF”. This incantation of Tory folklore is a symptom of a leader under stress, affirming faith in Margaret Thatcher and warding off socialist devils. However, Burnham has done nothing to support the claim that his government is a 70s tribute act, unless counting the appointment of a chancellor named Healey and price controls on buses.
Burnham’s diagnosis
What Burnham has done is trace Britain’s present malaise to choices made in the Thatcher era. From the threshold of No 10 he delivered the verdict: “Political power was centralised, economic power privatised, large parts of the country de-industrialised, and they still haven’t recovered.” That statement has become the foundation stone for an edifice of conservative commentary bemoaning Britain’s capture by anti-market, pro-state fanatics.
The British right is disoriented by a Labour prime minister whose message is not crafted to preempt accusations of leftism. Nigel Farage plays it safe with the flimsy complaint that Burnham lacks a mandate, knowing that isn’t how British politics works and that his own ratings are drifting downward.
Burnham’s Manchester model
Badenoch’s reach back to the 1970s is a default in the absence of better ideas. Burnham, though, spent nine years as mayor of Manchester, leaving it an enterprising capitalist city. He argues its success comes from pragmatic partnership between government and business, a model scalable nationally. He believes devolving power gives government a better feel for local needs. It is hardly wild dogma to suggest a strategically minded state can guide the market.
Conservatives might disagree, but it takes wilful denial to pretend Burnham’s Manchester blueprint is retro-socialism. He explicitly rejects the 20th-century central planner’s adage that “the gentleman in Whitehall knows best”.
A struggling opposition
It is normal for oppositions to take time to measure a new prime minister. Keir Starmer was a slippery target in opposition but in government made life easy for his enemies by shedding popularity. Badenoch did not need to develop an argument against a PM who struggled to explain his aims. The Tories were bystanders while Starmer’s government self-immolated, benefiting Reform and the Greens.
Badenoch’s personal ratings have picked up, but the Conservative vote share has not recovered from its worst ever defeat in July 2024. Disillusionment with Labour has not revived interest in a Conservative alternative. Badenoch wasted her first year worrying the Tories were too leftwing, endorsing defection to Reform. She then switched to fiscal parsimony but built nothing – no theory of public service reform, only a parallel universe where chronic overfunding and militant leftwing civil servants cause dissatisfaction.
MAGA influence
This vacuous analysis is coloured by excessive consumption of radical US conservative content. British politics has always felt transatlantic trends, but the radicalisation of the British right through Maga influence amounts to cognitive surrender. Political fandom has usurped judgment; craving validation from a foreign power takes precedence over loyalty to the national interest.
British conservatives fail to observe that Maga politics contains more heresies against Thatcherite creed than anything Burnham proposes. Donald Trump hates free trade, admires single-party regimes, imposes arbitrary tariffs, and extorts money from private companies. He acquired power by exploiting the same deindustrialisation that Burnham identifies as a cause of discontent. Burnham talks about healing wounds; Trump keeps them salted with partisan spite.
Maybe Burnham’s methods will not work. Perhaps his prescriptions are flawed. At least his diagnosis belongs in 2026. It is the leader of the opposition, craving reenactment of a battle won before she was born, who is stuck in the wrong century.
