Politics is so volatile these days. We are living through the current end of the two party system and the poly crisis of the cost of living, inequality, increasing repression and a boiling planet. So it is not surprising that in Makerfield next Thursday we have a unique by-election. Not only are voters electing an MP to represent this part of the North West  but since Starmer is a dead man walking they are also electing the next prime minister. All Labour membership surveys show Andy Burnham beating all comers. He is the only leading Labour Party politician with a reasonably positive personal rating among all voters.

There are many big questions arising out of Makerfiled. We will look at just a few here.

Will Burnham show us how to beat the far right in Makerfield?

Burnham’s  big selling point is that he is supposedly the Labour politician from the North where Reform is strong who knows how to beat Farage. He is uncontaminated by Starmer’s toxic cabinet that has failed to bring the change it promised in 2024. Burnham is the fabled King of the North, the popular Greater Manchester Mayor. His record there stands up better than the Westminster government. Although he greatly exaggerates the radical depth and extent of the Manchester changes at least he has developed a decent public transport network for people to use. It is not in common ownership but has a significant degree of public control. He has also presided over a housing and commercial property boom that everyone can see on the Manchester skyline.  

Inequality has not changed much despite a changed skyline nor has many social houses been built but it looks and feels like the economy is growing – at least compared to the average decline of much of the North.  He has also been good at publicising some limited initiatives around the homeless and young jobless. Labour members and the general public will choose that rather than a government that tried to take away the pensioners’ winter fuel allowance and wants to cut welfare and  disability benefits.

Burnham thinks that by pushing this bread and butter programme he can win back Reform voters. According to Guardian reporters there has been hardly any attack literature against Reform.  On Question time too it was noticeable how Burnham failed to take up the debate about migrants.  During the campaign he has several times reiterated that he supports Shabana Mahmood’s reactionary new proposals further tightening restrictions; although he might ‘look at a few details’ (classic Andy that). At the Manchester Evening News hustings his line on Belfast was to accuse Reform and others of stirring up tensions and to keep mentioning how the Tories have presided over the biggest increase in immigration. So essentially he accepted the terms of the debate framed by the mass media, Farage and the Tories – the problem is immigration, implicitly accepting that the attempted murder was tied to the immigration issue. The pogroms organised by the loyalists and fascists were not called out. His effort to woo Reform voters means there is no mention of Palestine or the crackdown on democratic rights.

We shall see what happens on election night but Burnham and his Labour advisors have obviously decided that they think they will lose votes if they defend migrants’ rights or challenge the Farage/Restore narrative. What a contrast with the Gorton/Denton byelection when the Green candidate directly and consistently challenged Farage on migration and other ‘hot’ issues.

What does his campaign look like?

His campaign reflects this ‘understanding’ of Reform voters. If you look at the main poster it is totally about Andy – Vote Andy is written alongside the Thunderbirds cartoon face and the words  For Us  underneath.  No politics at all, far less that the Hope not Hate on the posters of the Gorton Greens.

Labour is not mentioned very much and Starmer is like someone Stalin has declared a non person. When members of the public say to canvassers I hate Starmer and Labour the campaign  instructs them to say we are asking you to vote for Andy, mayor of Manchester not for Labour!

One amusing aspect has been the abnormal lengths Burnham has gone to in order to present himself as the normal bloke from the North. He must wake up every morning and work out his costume and lines. For example he is careful to mention football a lot and not to wear a tie or be seen in posh restaurants.

Is Burnham likely to win?

All the polls suggest he is going to win but it is not clear whether his total vote will be greater than the combined score of Reform and Restore. It is possible that Restore might get 5% or more that could divide the far right vote and deliver victory to Burnham. Indeed Restore led by Rupert Lowe, the Great Yarmouth MP who had an acrimonious split from Farage has been the surprise of the campaign. I have seen pictures of hundreds of their supporters flooding the constituency and travelling up from places like Kent. Lowe has a huge social media following bolstered by overseas money, including from trillionaire Elon Musk. His party is surging as a radicalisation to the right of Farage. They want to deport many more migrants, more quickly and are keen on bringing back the death penalty.

Burnham is also benefitting from the Greens running a quiet campaign. Caroline Lucas may not have succeeded in getting the Greens to withdraw for Andy but there has been no real mobilisation of members and this is reflected in the low poll ratings (less than Restore).

A victory with less votes than the far right would take a lot of the shine off Burnham’s project. Would the seat even be safe at the next general election? Two years of a Burnham premiership if he continues to drop his more radical policies, might not defend such seats. Of course a win is a win so the project will go forward but his opponents in the party might suggest that his supposedly soft left approach is not really defeating the far right.  The by-election data on this trend would back up the forecast of a Farage government or a coalition with the tories. Recently Kemi Bedonach has confirmed that while she is against an electoral deal she is ready to negotiate the formation of a government led by Farage

Is Burnham going to be prime minister?

Even a narrow victory sets him up for the leadership challenge everyone is pricing in quite quicky after Thursday. His team is in place and Starmer has been further weakened by the Defence spending debacle.  The only issue is whether there will be some sort of coronation or will Starmer and/or the Labour right challenge him. The defence issue is one that might galvanise the Labour right. However Burnham himself has not publicly opposed increased defence spending. Another factor that could neutralise a right wing challenge is Burnham’s notion of a broad church Labour Party where he would find space in his cabinet for people like Streeting or Mahmood.

Will Burnham end 40 years of neoliberalism?

His statement on this caused a big fuss inside Labour because obviously the era of neoliberalism includes the Blair governments. Even soft left MPs and members tend to mildly genuflect at the altar of Blairism – they pick out a few of his moderate reforms. All the evidence of Burham’s whole political career and his numerous recent U turns means the answer to this is a resounding no, He does not have a programme like the 2017 manifesto. Already the I paper has noted five  360 degree turns:

• Paying proper compensaton to the WASPI women who were cheated on their pension arrangements
• Bond markets – he now thinks it wrong to think the government is in hock to the bond traders
• Benefits for migrants – in 2023 he thought improving these was a good thing, nowadays he does not
• Brexit – he was keen for Britain to look at re-applying but since Makerfield he has talked about respecting the result and he has no plans for a referendum
• Full third term as Manchester Mayor – obviously that is now dead in the water

We could add two more to the I paper list. He has backtracked on supporting Trans people. He now supports the repressive Supreme court judgment. Finally he says he is not ‘squeamish’ about welfare reforms. This is particularly a kick in the teeth for the Labour base of his campaign because groups like Mainstream were built up because they stood up a bit to Starmer on the disability payments reform.

All that remains of his differences with the Starmer team is his proposal to take Water and Energy into public control. However public control covers a wide range of arrangements. There are some vague tax proposals on capital gains tax too but talk of a wealth tax has dimmed. One other issue of importance to Labour members is his call for a broad church and a less restrictive whipping operation. In other words he may well be more flexible. Possibly he understands that you cannot expel hundreds of activists, impose candidate selections, close down debate and expect people to campaign for you in elections.

Burnham has nothing to do with these regular protests in Manchester

Should the left let Burnham bleed?

Is Burnham heading up a real movement to transform Labour and society along the lines of the Corbyn project? Clearly not. Is he even going to head up a movement that is a moderate, pink version? It looks unlikely too. Corbyn at least had some sense that a movement had to develop not just inside the parliamentary Labour party or progressive think tanks. Burnham may talk about a different politics, revitalising the Labour party and community connection but these are just bland aspirations. Will he stand up against the military/industry complex and their demands for 3% of GDP on defence? In his very latest interview in the Independent he accepts cuts are necessary to increase defence spending. Even on further fossil fuel drilling Burnham tends to the Blue Labour side.

Another huge weakness in the Burnham camp is the failure to denounce the Israeli government’s genocide in Palestine and to defend democratic rights around non-violent direct action, jury trials and the definition of Palestine Action as terrorist. Burnham is either silent or complicit on all this.

It would be a big mistake for people on the left either inside or outside Labour to hitch their wagons to the Burnham train. We should have no illusions about the need to build an independent mass ecosocialist party to replace Labour rather than tailend the latest soft left project..  Burnham is not some sort of stepping stone on the way to that.

Does this mean Burnham is exactly the same as Starmer? Clearly not. His leadership has effects on the political terrain. He has been outside the Mandelson/McSweeney matrix and he has a more traditional Labourist outlook which includes rather more state intervention than that envisaged by Starmer. He may well favour a more democratic functioning inside Labour that will give some oxygen to those socialists who still think it is worth intervening in the Labour Party. His commitment to Proportional Representation – in the next government – remains on the table and would be a gain for democracy and the left. 

People who have a vote will support Burnham rather than Starmer or Streeting not so much for the small difference in policy but for the political space and debate his victory would open up particularly in the Labour Party and the unions. Already there are some signs that a debate on policy is more open than before. The radical left and left greens need to engage with this and not just parade some ideological purity and ignore it.

Defeating Reform/Restore in the ballot box is not a secondary matter either for socialists. A Farage led government would make it harder for socialists to organise. A worse political situation does not mean that people move to the left. Thatcherism and Brexit have shown that. In fact his government would further radicalise Tommy Robinson and open fascist currents. Imagine the fillip to the fortunes of Reform if on Thursday they were to win despite Burnham and the huge resources Labour is throwing at it. It would make a Farage government more not less likely.  So a vote for Burnham against Reform is a legitimate tactic for socialists on Thursday and in a general election. Although it is only a tactic, one small part of our activity and not our primary task – it does not imply a political endorsement of his politics.