Andy Burnham has pledged to go 'faster' than Keir Starmer, but the question remains whether the machinery of state is inherently jammed or if the slow pace is more personal than institutional. Eighteen months into his premiership, Starmer himself voiced frustration with the speed of government, blaming successive administrations for layering procedures and consultations to avoid mistakes. Pollster Julian Gallie of Merlin Strategy notes that voters have been 'crying out for change for a decade,' with Brexit, the Corbyn surge, the Johnson majority, and the 2024 Tory rout all reflecting 'a desperate roll of the dice against a status quo' that seems immovable.
Historical precedents for rapid change
History suggests that emergencies are the most powerful catalyst for swift action. Franklin Roosevelt's first 100 days leveraged widespread bankruptcies and bank failures to push 15 major laws through Congress. In 1940, the British war cabinet rapidly embraced full political union with France. During the 2008 financial crisis, the UK government nationalised half the banking system after months of dithering over Northern Rock. The pandemic saw a blitzkrieg of new laws locking down citizens and improvising wage subsidies, sweeping aside data governance and procurement protocols.
Starmer's procedural caution vs. Burnham's bold rhetoric
Lisa Nandy predicts that Burnham's administration will be 'faster and bolder' than Starmer's. Starmer, despite his impatience, embodies what Francis Fukuyama calls 'procedural fetishism,' appearing reluctant to take risks. In contrast, Burnham has vowed to spend 'political capital' on a comprehensive care service, a goal he has agitated for since his time as health secretary. However, the public finances constrain this ambition; every reform proposal—cost caps, cost sharing, entitlement guarantees—requires more spending.
Fiscal realities and the cost of living
Burnham recently expressed concerns about employers and pensioners hit by Rachel Reeves's tax rises, hinting at easing off. The need for speed is driven by voter impatience and deep doubts that politics can effect change, according to Gallie. A tax-raising budget could signal momentum, while delay would foreshadow failure. Liz Truss's decisive fuel bill cap underscores the tension between ambition and fiscal reality. Political economist Michael Jacobs proposes subsidising unit prices only up to a certain usage level, roughly halving costs, funded by raising capital gains tax to match income tax. Another idea is a temporary rent freeze, with the state snapping up properties landlords sell.
Cheap, easy wins from pro-competition economists
Tim Leunig, architect of the pandemic furlough scheme, offers a list of quick wins: abolishing ground rents for leaseholders, giving customers access to insurance algorithms, opening Virgin Media's cable network to rivals, and allowing generic drug manufacturers to advertise equivalence to branded products. Each requires an early row with vested interests but makes something specific cheaper.
Momentum and direction
Despite Starmer's grumbles, his government proved dynamic on renters' rights, employment rights, and net zero—areas where it knew exactly what it wanted. The huge question for Burnham is whether he knows his own mind. Once he masters the steering wheel, pressing the accelerator becomes much less of a problem.
