What can a Burnham Premiership do for The North?

In June, our founder wrote for the Yorkshire Post looking at the change in leadership coming to this country. Would you believe, for example, that if (when?) Andy Burnham is elected as the next Prime Minister of this country, he will be the first holder of that title to have been born in the North since 1976? So with cards already marked on a shift of power away from Whitehall, what opportunities does this present? Read the full article below.

Ending the doom-loop of leadership change

By Julian Pearce, Founder of Yasper

There is never a good time to lose a Prime Minister of the sixth biggest economy in the world, but there is plenty that makes this a particularly bad time to do so.

Some will point out that there was a political imperative for change to happen sooner rather than later. That pressure had built to such an extent that it had to escape one way or another. And that Keir Starmer’s time was up: he had his chance and didn’t live up to expectations.

When the Prime Minister stood on the steps of Downing Street at the start of this week, he fired the starting gun which will see the seventh incumbent of Number Ten in a little over a decade. To put things in context, the decade before saw four inhabitants of that exclusive address, while in the ten years before that, there were just two.

Sir Robert Walpole is by consensus considered the first British Prime Minister, having been appointed in 1721. Since that time, we have had 58 other incumbents, with more than 10% of those sitting in the past decade – an extraordinary statistic.

This country doesn’t – or didn’t – have a habit of changing Prime Ministers regularly, and for good reason. Longevity was equated with continuity, stoicism and strength. It fostered respect on a world stage and amounted to consistent policy decisions that were made for the long-term future of the country.

Chopping and changing those in power shouldn’t be done on a whim or depending on which way the winds are blowing. But as a nation, it seems we have become impatient for change and hungry to apportion blame.

The wider consideration is that a change in the top job isn’t a simple or straightforward swap. A new Prime Minister will bring a new team, new policies and, in all likelihood, an entirely new direction of travel.

This may offer opportunities, for example to free-up seemingly inflexible fiscal rules that have been a mark of this government, but it also leaves many questions unanswered. There are critical decisions that need to be taken, and it is imperative that the Government continues to be effective through this change.

Perhaps most critical is decision-making on defence spending. Indeed, the trigger for the current situation was the MP for Doncaster North, John Healey, quitting as Defence Secretary, because of a row about a £5 billion shortfall in the forthcoming Defence Investment Plan. We have already been made to wait for the detail of that plan, but a change in leadership risks further uncertainty at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions.

There are vital decisions that need to be taken on healthcare, industry, cyber resilience and environment, which are all in motion. Each decision will require new ministers being brought up to speed and inevitable delay.

There is a real sense that we need to focus on the future, rather than on redressing the perceived wrongs of the past. It would be a fool’s errand to pause decision-making now, at a critical time for the UK.

So why do appear to be stuck in this doom-loop of leadership change? Are the electorate to blame, for picking the wrong people? Are MPs at fault for not being able to hold their nerve in the face of adversity? Or have we just been unlucky to the extent that we have suffered a statistical anomaly, and had a string of leaders that just aren’t up to the job?

Arguably, politics, and the way we view it, has changed. The proliferation of 24-hour news cycles in the 1990s and social media in the 2000s have changed the rules of engagement.

Now that it seems all but certain that Andy Burnham will soon become the 60th Prime Minister of Great Britain, what can he do to change things for the better?

The last Northern-born Prime Minister this country has was Harold Wilson, who held the role in 1964-1970 and again in 1974-1976. He was famous for his press conferences delivered from the sandy shores of the Isles of Scilly, from which, by coincidence, I am writing these words, having grown up there myself.

Wilson was often described as a ‘man of the people’, someone who was just as at home at the despatch box as he was in a working men’s club in his native Huddersfield. This provided a level of accessibility that simply doesn’t exist today and is surely one of the reasons the modern electorate feels so disconnected. Can Burnham move beyond the hyped ‘King of the North’ spectre to truly connect with the people? Only time will tell.

Successive governments have talked about levelling-up in one form or another, and we have, of course, had senior politicians who have held constituency seats in the North more recently. But being born in the North brings with it a lived experience that is difficult to replicate.

Having to suffer inequalities when it comes to transport, education and healthcare does tend to bring a fresh perspective – perhaps a Northern perspective in Number Ten will mean we feel a greater sense of decisions being taken with us, instead of for us.

It would be refreshing to have someone in charge who understands the pressures – and massive opportunities – that exist in this part of the world.