Rachel Reeves has returned to public debate, arguing that she "absolutely" got all the big calls right as chancellor and that the pro-European, money-in-pockets agenda now associated with Andy Burnham was not invented by him. Her comments, previewing a lecture at Harvard University, come days after a deliberately low-key budget that left some Labour MPs questioning the end of neoliberalism.
Reeves Defends Her Record
In interviews published in last weekend's Sunday papers, Reeves reflected on her time in power, acknowledging a few things she would have done differently but insisting her groundwork made John Healey's budget last week far easier. She was clearly devastated by losing a job she loved, and her return after a summer of quiet recovery has sparked speculation about a comeback.
Her timing is acute, arriving as it does after a budget that some Labour MPs felt lacked ambition. Loyalists inside the old inner circle point out that Reeves and Starmer were both fervent remainers and would have loved to be back inside the EU one day, but the time wasn't right when they ran for office.
Continuity With Starmer's Policies
The package of sanctions on Israeli settlers announced by foreign secretary Ed Miliband in September, alongside an apology for what he considered Starmer had got wrong on Gaza, was essentially the measures his predecessor Yvette Cooper had spent her last weeks at the Foreign Office working up, which couldn't be published until a new prime minister was formally in place.
Darren Jones, Starmer's former close lieutenant, is openly arguing that this administration's answer to a looming crisis in defence spending is "what Keir and Rachel were going to do", if they hadn't been forced out by John Healey resigning as defence secretary in protest at something remarkably like the strategy he's now pursuing. Starmer himself made a rare public intervention in Dublin last week, warning that the US withdrawal from European defence will outlast the Trump era.
Burnham's Approach Under Scrutiny
While the Starmerites are smarting at history being rewritten by the winners, some are failing to recognise their part in their own downfall. Starmer was ultimately ousted by his own MPs because they were exasperated by his failure to lead and sensed the country had turned against him.
Burnham has proved he can take decisions and build an emotional bond with the public his predecessor couldn't. He might only have moved the needle fractionally on issues like Palestine or Europe, where manifesto red lines mean nothing significant can change this side of a general election, but each time he has done just enough to achieve the political impact Starmer was chasing but couldn't pull off.
Looking Ahead to the 10-Year Plan
Some MPs are anxious to hear a bigger vision from Burnham than fixing social care and banning loud music on the bus. Since there wasn't one in the budget, all eyes are on the 10-year plan, now expected some time in December.
Burnham has offered small, popular changes so far – £100 off energy bills, a No 10 North office in Manchester – which have been in part about buying breathing space while he gets to grips with bigger challenges, from welfare reforms to defusing a Labour revolt over Shabana Mahmood's plan to make migrants wait longer for settlement rights. By Christmas we should know whether Burnham is offering genuine new thinking in British politics, or something more like the old kind, regifted.
