Andy Burnham isn’t Labour’s saviour, he’s just looked better in a softer job

His popularity outside Manchester rests on two things. The illusion that he has driven the area’s success. And the fact his fingerprints aren’t on the political calamities of the past decade.

In national government terms, Burnham is clean. But that’s not enough.

Labour doesn’t need someone who simply looks less flawed than Keir Starmer. It needs someone who can carry the country with them.

If Andy Burnham really is a political superstar, why did nobody notice when he was actually in government?

He served in senior cabinet roles under Blair and Brown. He was Health Secretary. He was Culture Secretary.

He was just another cabinet member who most people couldn’t name.

In government, Burnham was solid, safe and unremarkable. That is not an insult. It is how he was seen.

So what has changed?

Very little. The man is the same. It’s the job that’s different.

The role of metro mayor is one of the most flattering in politics. It offers a large platform, sizeable budgets and constant media access.  The job spares its holders from the hardest decisions that come with national office or running a council.

Metro mayors aren’t battered by spending reviews or forced into rows over cuts to frontline services. It is a position that allows competent politicians to look exceptional.

Burnham has done a decent job in Greater Manchester. The city region has continued to progress under his watch and he’s been a strong advocate for it. But Manchester’s revival didn’t begin when he arrived. It began decades earlier.

The transformation of the city started in the 1990s, when higher education expanded, graduates stayed, start-ups emerged and investment followed. The BBC’s move to Salford was a huge boost. Even the 1996 IRA bomb played a role, creating the opportunity for wholesale redevelopment at the city’s heart.

Burnham inherited a city already moving in the right direction. He was smart enough to let it ride and not get in the way.

Manchester isn’t unique. Liverpool has seen comparable progress without a metro mayor for much of it. Large-scale regeneration is driven by long-term trends, demographic shifts and capital flows, not by the arrival of a single figure.

While in government, Burnham twice stood for the Labour leadership. Once he was eliminated in the first round. The second time he was heavily beaten by Jeremy Corbyn. This is not the record of a man who naturally commands his party.

But here we are. Starmer will be gone before long and no one seems ready to step in. At this point, the mission is simple. Improve the polls and stabilise the party.

Burnham looks like the easy answer.  But he isn’t.

He is the trap Labour looks set to fall into.

He’s popular in a forgiving role. That is not the same as having the political capital to survive national office in the toughest of times.

We’ve seen this before. Politicians are popular when they’re handing things out and avoiding hard choices. The moment they face reality, that popularity fades.

Metro mayors don’t live in financial reality. They operate in a world of nice announcements, investment wins and central government funding.  The don’t have the backlash that comes with raising taxes or cutting services.

If Burnham returns to Westminster and faces those choices, his mayoralty won’t look like preparation for PM. It will look irrelevant.

Labour will replace Starmer. But if it turns to Andy Burnham expecting transformation, it will be disappointed.

He is decent, capable and likeable. He always was.

Labour is not discovering a leader. It is mistaking a role for a record.

_

Andy Preston, is a TV and radio political commentator; (also Conservative Party donor and former Mayor of Middlesbrough)

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk