I don’t think Andy Burnham would make a good Prime Minister because I believe his politics lean too heavily towards redistribution and I am skeptical of the skills of expanded state intervention. Water companies anyone?, rather than focusing enough on long-term growth, productivity and wealth creation. I’m not anit intervention. Investment in healthcare, education, infrastructure and helping people become more productive members of society is important. A functioning society should support vulnerable people and create opportunities for those who can improve their situation.
He is more Left than Kier. I'm concerned about the focus on redistributing “existing wealth” without addressing the underlying issues limiting growth. Not all wealth creation is harmful. There is a major difference between productive businesses that create jobs and contribute to the economy, and large corporations using aggressive tax avoidance strategies or limiting/eliminating competition. There is also a difference between ordinary homeowners, ordinary workers and institutions holding vast property portfolios.
I hate that Labour often uses the politics of envy to get a green light to go after easier targets rather solving actual problems. I anticipate more of this with him. A lot of the language used around redistribution is framed in compassionate terms like “levelling up opportunity”, “supporting working people”, “fairness”, “bringing children out of poverty” or “making the wealthy pay their fair share”. Yet the language used to describe those paying the most for it can become dehumanising. Ordinary homeowners and people on relatively normal salaries who worked, paid taxes, saved into pensions and bought a family home are increasingly described as “asset rich”, “the broadest shoulders”, “privileged” or “those with more”. That matters. There is a huge difference between someone owning one home on an ordinary salary and institutions or individuals holding massive property portfolios and generating wealth at an entirely different scale.
I support anyone who wants reduce poverty and increase opportunity, including building more homes and improving public services. But we should be focusing on growing the pie, not just redistributing thinner slices of the same small pie differently. Growth creates more jobs, more opportunities and ultimately more resources to support those who genuinely need help. We have a growing welfare state, slow / no growth, not enough homes , jobs or resources. So redistribution of an ever decreasing pie isn't going to solve the problem.
I look at Andy and all I see is someone telling people to know their place and lower their expectations, rather than truly offering them a hand up. And I think he is prepared to use the money of people who have done the right thing to help build his political fiefdom in pursuit of greater power and glory. I mean the 100k a year for life is not bad for what will likely be just 2 years work...
He resigned from being a bit player in Westminster to become the “King of the North”, but as soon as there is even a hint of a path back to the top job, it suddenly becomes “nice knowing you Manchester, well hello London, all hail your new King of Westminster!" The presumption that the people of Makerfield, who only recently voted for their local representatives should simply accept a democratically elected MP stepping aside so Andy can pursue national power says a lot about how politics increasingly treats voters as feckless pawns. I , personally hope he gets his arse handed to him.