Andy Burnham launched his Makerfield by-election campaign on Friday (Alamy)

4 min read50 min

Last week, Labour MP and former minister Josh Simons announced he would give up his Makerfield constituency – after being elected for the first time just two years ago – to allow Greater Manchester Mayor Burnham a shot at re-entering Parliament via a by-election.

With Burnham now having been selected as the Labour candidate, the by-election will go ahead on 18 June. If he wins, the mayor is expected to challenge Prime Minister Keir Starmer for the Labour leadership. 

“British politics is tired,” Burnham said, addressing a crowd of supporters at the Labour campaign launch in Makerfield on Friday morning. 

“It needs a new script. And over the next four weeks, the people of Makerfield are going to write that script.”

He repeatedly tapped into a sense of Westminster politics not working for people around the country.

“This by-election will force Westminster to focus on the places it usually looks past,” he said.

“I love this place, I love the people of this place, but what I have inside is a burning sense of injustice that the proud communities of this place face a Westminster system that puts them at the bottom of the list. They should be at the top of the list.”

He called for “change to Westminster politics so that it works for people”.

“This by-election is a clarion call for change, change for people, a place I love so much,” Burnham continued.

“Change to the economy, change to education, change to housing, change to transport, change to care, and yes, to make it all possible, change to politics. 

Summarising his campaign in three words, Burnham said: “I’m for us.”

He also said he recognised that the Labour Party “needs to change”. 

“We need to be better than we’ve been,” he said. 

“We’ve not been good enough, and I want to leave people in no doubt today. A vote for me in this by-election campaign is a vote to change Labour. It is a vote to give the people here in these communities who supported us through the years their party back. This is a vote for a party that is solidly on the side of working-class people and working-class communities.”

On transport, Burnham said “I like my buses”, referring to the scheme he oversaw which brought Greater Manchester buses back under public control in 2023. However, he highlighted ongoing concerns about the cost of rail journeys.

“£364 is the cost of an anytime return from Wigan North Western to London Euston,” he said. 

“So how can people here connect with the capital and all of the opportunities it’s got, if they cannot afford those train fares? We need to use rail re-nationalisation to reduce those train fares and make them affordable to people again.”

He also brought Liverpool Mayor Steve Rotheram to stand alongside him, and praised the successes of Greater Manchester and Liverpool since they both left Westminster as MPs to become mayors.

“In those ten years we have built a new politics,” Burnham said. 

“We’ve worked on a place-first basis, rather than party first. We’ve focused on problem-solving rather than point scoring. And you know what? When you do that and you work differently, it’s amazing what you can achieve, isn’t it?”

Burnham also pointed to the need to change education and advocated for an education system “that doesn’t just focus on the university route”, but “focuses on the kids who want technical pathways to those new industries”.

He said he was feeling “emotional” about the campaigning bringing him “back to where it all began” in Westminster, and batted away accusations that he is using this by-election as a “stepping stone” to power.

“How can it be a stepping stone if it takes you back to where it all began?” he said.

“Surely it can’t, and the reason it comes back to is because I’ve never stopped what I started 25 years ago. I fought for these people in these places as a member of Parliament, I fought for them as a minister… We fought for people in the North West of England, fought for people here, we fought for them as mayors together…

“I would carry that fight forward if I am lucky enough to be elected as the MP for Makerfield. I’ll take that fight as high as I can possibly take it, and that’s the journey I’ve always been on. And it’s not a new journey for me, it’s the same journey, just in a different phase, and that’s what this is all about.”

Check your extension lead is safe

Help and support:

5 min read1 hr

There was something about it that wasn’t quite like the other chess boards piled in a corner as if hiding. It was the day after Boxing Day and I was idling in a favourite shop in the town of Corbridge, between Newcastle and Hexham. With little else to do, I investigated and so stumbled on an artefact at once trivial and timely. For instead of the regulation black and white squares, this board carried slogans such as One Man One Vote, Home Rule and Abolition of the Lords.

What was this? The front of the board proclaimed it to be House of Commons – The New Parliamentary Game. New it might once have been: the packaging suggested that it had not been new for at least a century.

Delight at unearthing this piece of parliamentary ephemera was tempered by the fact that were no playing pieces – and no rules. Further investigation was needed. I handed over my £3 and embarked on the quest.

The first point of inquiry after the Christmas recess was Patrick Vollmer, chief librarian of the Lords. Did this game exist in the parliamentary archives, a virgin copy kept in one of its vaults?

No, but he did pass on some leads to chase. A website for board game geeks gave the rules (extraordinarily complicated), and more surprisingly a link to the Bodleian Library, surely the repository of historic and valuable manuscripts? True, but also it turns out the home of 1,600 games and pastimes gifted this century. And there it was, on the Bodleian website, a photo of five of the eight required playing pieces, featuring pictures of prominent Liberal and Conservative MPs and peers from the game’s 1896 creation.

Jo Maddocks, the Bodleian’s curator of ephemera invited us (my wife Clare had by now joined the quest) up to Oxford to take a look, where we discovered that although the library has some of the playing pieces it doesn’t possess the rules or the board. We reunited them all for photos. Asquith, Campbell-Bannerman, Rosebery, Devonshire and Chamberlain re-emerged into the limelight. Turned out we were the first people to have requested a view.

Back in Parliament, a plan was hatched to play the game, possibly for the first time in 100 years. Given that ‘Abolition of the Lords’ (in its all hereditary form) is one of the squares on the board, two hereditaries were my obvious target.

While Clare brilliantly copied the Bodleian pieces and made the required additional three, I went on the trail of game hereditary peers. Fortuitously, the Earl of Clancarty was enthusiastic, and he was about to meet up with the Earl of Lytton. A brace of earls, result!

A week later we gathered in one of the splendid rooms formerly part of the Lord Chancellor’s flat. For Lord Lytton, Parliament’s foremost expert on Planning and Building law, it was a special day (his last in the Lords), having decided a year ago to retire at 75. The minister, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, had paid tribute to him. Opposite: Lord Clancarty a prominent champion of the arts and the creative industries. He’s just discovered that he is to be one of the few outgoing hereditaries to  receive a life peerage. Both crossbenchers, Lord Clancarty gamely took the governing Tories’ side, Lord Lytton the opposition Liberals. Shaking hands, the game commenced.

Poor old backbench pawns move just one square at a time

Of course, the object of the game is for the government to pass acts on the subjects depicted on the board by landing a player on each of the two similarly named squares. The opposition’s job is to prevent that. According to the rules, the PM and what the board refers to as the Chief Opposition Spokesman can move in all directions across the board, while his cabinet and their shadows (a term formalised in the 1920s) rather fewer. Poor old backbench pawns move just one square at a time.

Let battle commence. First bill? Abolition of the Lords of course. Lord Lytton scored an early victory in saving the House; on the rematch Lord Clancarty got it abolished. Soon a whole radical manifesto was laid before them: licensing laws, payment of MPs, Home Rule, disestablishment and voting rights. It’s a fun game, perhaps the parliamentary shops should bring out a new edition?

Having reached an honourable draw, the two earls went their way. Lord Clancarty to a meeting, Lord Lytton heading off for a last stint in the Chamber, say his goodbyes and clear his desk after some 30 years. As the politician playing pieces were packed away, I noticed that all the measures on the board have been tackled since the game’s creation. All except one: Disestablishment of the Church of England. That thorny question has even managed to outlive the hereditaries in the House of Lords. 

Officers at work on the bridge of HMS Dragon as it sails into Limassol, Cyprus, 27 April 2026 (Photography, LPhot Helayna Birkett. UK MOD © Crown copyright 2026)

6 min read1 hr

In the early days of the Iran conflict, as UK allies in the Gulf – and even Cyprus – were being hit by drones and missiles, Keir Starmer pledged to send a warship to help defend them.

The only problem was the only available vessel, HMS Dragon, was undergoing a refit in Portsmouth. The effort to get the ship ready was extraordinary but there was no escaping the embarrassment.

The Royal Navy has been the object of ridicule from US secretary of war Pete Hegseth and, repeatedly, Donald Trump himself. It is widely acknowledged that the UK has an inadequate number of warships currently available, with new frigates only coming into service at the end of the decade.

But a navy is about more than its vessels – and data uncovered by The House suggests that not all is well with its personnel.

On the face of it, the health of the Royal Navy is improving after decades of cuts. By January 2026, it was reported that there had been a 14.5 per cent uptick in the numbers of people joining the navy, with the fleet boasting a strength of around 32,160 personnel.

But according to a Freedom of Information request made by The House, the number of personnel who passed their fitness tests between 2014 and 2024 fell dramatically.

 Between 2014 and 2015, 96.6 per cent of both men and women in the fleet passed their fitness tests on first attempt. However, 10 years later only 77 per cent of people passed the exams initially – a drop of almost 20 percentage points.

The number of Royal Navy personnel who failed their fitness tests at the first time of asking but passed within a year increased from 21 people to 1,219, 10 years later. Meanwhile, the same data found that Royal Navy personnel who failed their fitness tests on their first attempt then passed more than a year later rose from six people in 2014 to 86 a decade later.

As the navy grapples with falling standards and recruitment shortfalls, how can it restore and improve standards within its ranks?

Fred Thomas, Labour MP for Plymouth Moor View and a former Royal Marines officer, tells The House why he believes the numbers have declined.

“The overall offer was eroded year by year under the Conservative Party when they heavily cut funding,” he says. “The combined total of: how enjoyable is the job, what does it pay, what perks do you get including housing and medical benefits, how much status does it confer in society? How proud are you of your work for the navy and what sacrifices are you willing to make for the job?

“This will sound political but they hollowed out the military and it’s in a bad place now. It’ll take many years to turn it around. And at the same time we desperately need to modernise our capabilities.”

Many of the navy’s problems do not emanate from just cash flow problems either. Experts argue that in an increasingly competitive job market there are more careers out there which attract people’s interest – whether they be easier or more glamorous.

Commodore (Ret’d) Steve Prest, Rusi associate fellow, says people join the navy for one reason and that is it is better than the alternatives.

He adds: “Now it is different because young people, especially, often don’t want to be away and disconnected. A recent patrol had submariners away for 205 days under water, where they don’t have the ability to send information off the submarine. In the modern era, people expect to remain connected; when they see a blue tick, they expect a response instantaneously.

“It’s not to say a career in the Royal Navy is not rewarding. I know of people who were recently on that trip and thought it was one of the best things they ever did. It’s just harder to persuade people to go into the navy when everywhere else is so connected.”

Prest admits numbers have gone up a little, as recruitment has improved – despite the trained strength in the fleet having dropped. This means that the overall experience in the navy has reduced, with experienced staff leaving faster than the experience which can be grown in newcomers.

This will sound political but they hollowed out the military and it’s in a bad place now. It’ll take many years to turn it around

“With limited opportunities for people to gain sea experience, owing to the paucity of seagoing vessels, this is a real concern,” Prest tells The House.

 “It means the ships’ companies bringing the new-build frigates into service will be vastly less experienced than their predecessors.

“We need a more balanced pipeline. The new recruits all need time at sea and interesting places to visit. There are no shortcuts to learning under those who know the ropes.”

The navy has also been affected by falling wages, which have cut across the public sector.

From day one, new officer recruits earn £34,676 per year. This will increase to £41,456 after their first promotion, followed by £52,815 as a lieutenant. The highest captain within the fleet will earn £122,849.

With a healthy pension and access to subsidised accommodation, the offer on the face of it looks good. Yet the problem is two-fold: talented people can earn far more in the private sector, in blossoming careers such as software engineering and coding; secondly, experts say demand is still depressed from cuts inflicted during austerity.

Admiral Lord West, former first sea lord and chief of the Naval Staff from 2002 to 2006, says: “Part of the problem is there was no pressure to recruit more people, the manpower was cut. When you depress something it’s difficult to try and bring it up to the same level again.”

He tells The House that the bottom line is that there is not enough money for the MoD – like most government departments.

And without greater investment, existing naval talent is going to waste, warns Prest: “If we don’t have enough ships to get them out on missions, then we can lose some of the best recruits as they idle ashore – that’s not what they joined to do.”