I share your hope re Burnham.
I think Starmer is ok. But ok is not really good enough. We need somebody better than ok.
Difficult to explain why I think Starmer is just ok, but I can maybe explain in toolmaker terms.
So a toolmaker does an apprenticeship, Then a good few years on the tools. They might become a foreman, then a toolroom manager. But they can, and do, go back on the tools for a rush job. They might set up their own shop and end up MD of a big company. But they can still go back to the tools.
Starmer, to me, comes across as super ambitious. He start's an apprenticeship, does not finish it. He moves into QA. Is a QA supervisor by the time his fellow apprentices are finishing serving their time. Then Starmer is sucking up to the boss, moves into production. He does just enough to get promoted. Sometimes he is promoted because there is nobody else. He makes it to sales director, then does a hostile takeover to be CEO.
To me, Starmer is always wanting the promotion without being bothered at actually being really good at the steps to get there.
As evidence, he was head of the CPS, but as PM he keeps referring to seeking legal council. Why ? Why is he using other lawyers to advise him when he was the top lawyer.
And I think for him, as PM he is the same. It's a stepping stone to the next bit. A Lord, a world statesman. He appears to always be looking at the next step up with the minimum effort in the actual job of the moment. He passes the job that he is employed to do to advisors.
But we need a time served toolmaker who can go on the tools. Someone who is good at the basics. The stuff that Starmer skipped.
That's how I see it.