4 min read16 min

I have seen six prime ministers since I ioined joined Ipsos in 2019. That turnover raises an obvious question: how confident should Andy Burnham be that he will last longer than those who came before him? And can he avoid the mistakes of his predecessor?

First impressions count

For now, the new Prime Minister appears focused on one thing above all else: demonstrating that his government really understands the pressures facing ordinary households. His first week has seen the announcement of a raft of measures aimed at easing the cost of living.

These include plans to scrap VAT on electricity bills, cap bus fares and raise a glass to much-loved pubs with an eye-catching reduction in business rates.

This focus makes sense.

Ipsos polling has consistently shown economic pessimism at historically high levels in recent years. Meanwhile, our new report, Understanding Society: From Walkmans to WiFi to What?, finds that only 53 per cent of Britons are satisfied with their standard of living today, compared with 72 per cent in 1989. At this year’s local elections, the cost of living was also the number one issue on the minds of English voters.

Burnham and his team will know that any PM promising change must persuade voters he “gets it”.

The importance of starting well

Anyone who follows Ipsos long-term trends will be conscious of the need to start well.

Recent Ipsos analysis of Keir Starmer’s premiership showed that his honeymoon period was remarkably short. Starmer began his premiership with a net favourability rating of +7 in July 2024 but by October had fallen to -26.

Early controversies, including the so-called freebies row and the backlash over means-testing winter fuel payments, proved politically damaging and created an impression of a government struggling to connect with public concerns. Burnham will be hoping to avoid a similar fate.

A pessimistic public

Yet he enters office facing a public that is arguably more pessimistic than at any point in recent decades. Our report shows that 83 per cent of people believe Britain is heading in the wrong direction today, compared with 55 per cent in 1989.

When people are asked what is bad about life in Britain, concerns about the cost of living and dissatisfaction with government feature prominently.

That dissatisfaction runs deep. Almost half of the public (47 per cent) now say the system of government in Britain needs a great deal of improvement – more than three times the proportion saying the same in the early 1970s. Trust in traditional politics has weakened significantly, helping to fuel the rise of challenger parties on both the left and right.

The electoral consequences have been profound. For much of the post-war era, more than seven in ten voters backed either Labour or the Conservatives.  

Today, support for the two main parties combined is often closer to four in ten. The fragmentation of British politics means governments can no longer assume they will automatically be given the benefit of the doubt.

Meeting the challenge

That is the backdrop against which Burnham begins his premiership.

His instinct to focus on the cost of living appears politically sound. He is meeting the public where they are, with more than 7 in 10 concerned about the cost of living for them personally.

The issue matters to voters and offers a clear opportunity to demonstrate that his government can improve people’s lives. Starmer’s failure to establish a positive narrative early on proved difficult to reverse.

The challenge for Burnham is that he faces a public which is deeply sceptical not just about politicians, but about whether politics itself can deliver meaningful change.

But “the benefit of the doubt” clearly seems to be there for now. Exclusive data for PoliticsHome shows that a significant chunk of voters (42 per cent) has neither a positive nor negative view of him at present. And 54 per cent did not express a view on whether he would do a good job or a bad job on the cost of living specifically.  

Whether it still exists in six months will depend on whether voters feel their lives are starting to improve.

That, more than any announcement made during his first week, is likely to determine whether Burnham’s premiership succeeds where Starmer’s ultimately failed.

Keiran Pedley is Director of Politics at Ipsos

spiked is funded by readers like you. Only 0.1% of regular readers currently support us. If just 1% did, we could grow our team and step up the fight for free speech and democracy.

Become a spiked supporter and enjoy unlimited, ad-free access, bonus content and exclusive events – while helping to keep independent journalism alive.

Image by: PA Images / Alamy

4 min read1 min

I was astonished when, fresh from his trip to Buckingham Palace, Andy Burnham stood in front of Downing Street and named the eradication of rough sleeping as his first priority as Prime Minister.

It’s a preoccupation that has obsessed us at the Big Issue since the September 1991 creation of magazine. In one moment, the 35 years of pushing to rid us of rough sleeping in particular – and homelessness in general – seemed as if it’s paid off.

Burnham has the very best of intentions, but critics and friends alike will point out his plan is easier said than done. All cautious of hope before delivery – promising the earth and delivering a flowerpot. Isn’t Burnham promising way more than he could possibly achieve? We’ve heard similar rhetoric before, including when another mayor turned PM, Boris Johnson, bounced into No 10 in 2019.

I remember when rough sleeping became an increasing reality. In 1961 as a 15-year-old runaway dodging the police, you would not, or could not, sleep rough. You would be arrested. Strict vagrancy and ‘no fixed abode’ laws were used liberally. Instead you hid in derelict or abandoned buildings, away from the public eye. You might call it social cleansing. The social dislocation of homelessness was kept away from scrutiny.

But by the mid-1960s something had changed. Begging and rough sleeping seemed to be ignored by the police. Gradually streets in the centre of our cities, principally London, took on a new reality. The dispossessed became visible. So what started off as a social cleansing system was allowed to fall apart. The vagrancy laws remained in place until only a few weeks ago, but they were used less often. Usually you could wrap your self up in something and sleep where commerce traded and the public wandered.

Burnham, at long last, looks set to prioritise this social injustice, and we thank him for that

Advertisement

A new ingrained reality became acceptable. A human rights abuse became visible. More people fell between the cracks of a once all-encompassing welfare system and straight down onto the cold, hard pavement.

Social sores were displayed as government washed its hands of responsibility. The problem was largely passed onto charities. An attitude of “You sort it out” seemed to emanate from police, local authorities and central government. And while this mindset has shifted somewhat in the years since, levels of rough sleeping have continued to wax and wane, and today the crisis remains stubbornly present in our towns and cities.

Burnham, at long last, looks set to prioritise this social injustice, and we thank him for that. From my place in the House of Lords, and in the pages of the Big Issue, we will offer our support and advice on how he can make his vision a reality. Because ending rough sleeping will require a huge collective effort. It needs strong leadership by government but must be done arm-in-arm with local authorities, businesses and the third sector.

It also requires some clever problem solving. For a start – how do you rollout Housing First nationwide when we still have a chronic lack of homes? Perhaps Burnham could look to unlock the 300,000 long-term empty homes sitting pretty across Britain. Funding councils to bring these properties back into use is the sort of long-term ‘spend to save’ measure we need to fix the country.

This pledge centres homelessness as a blight on the face of society. There are other blights. The biggest to me is the 40 per cent of governmental income going on maintaining people in poverty. We need to shift to a prevention mindset when it comes to breaking the cycle of poverty. As of yet the delivery of clear and cogent poverty dismantling thinking has been poor. But I live in hope.

Lord Bird is a crossbench peer and founder of the Big Issue

3 min read8 min

The Constitution Unit’s newly published report – Safeguarding the Constitution: Key Steps to Strengthen UK Democratic Resilience – lays out a set of practical reforms to respond to these challenges.  

Most obviously, these include measures to address known vulnerabilities or loopholes. For example, key ethics regulators should now be given a statutory footing so that they cannot be undermined or abolished at a prime minister’s whim. The process for appointments to the House of Lords should be reformed, ending the unconstrained power of patronage that currently allows a prime minister to appoint as many people as they wish, with no requirements for fair party balance and no enforceable propriety constraints.

In some cases, institutions and processes also need to evolve to match the changing context in which they operate. The arrangements for parliamentary scrutiny of international agreements, for example, have changed little in the past 100 years; the limited role they afford MPs is increasingly out of kilter with the scope and impact of modern treaties.

Similarly, political finance rules have not kept pace with parties’ growing reliance on major donors, and the corresponding risk that a small group gains disproportionate political influence. The government has already promised some welcome changes in response to the Rycroft Review on foreign financial interference, and has requested a review of spending limits from the Electoral Commission. Detailed work on donation caps should take place alongside that.

Strengthening our constitution does not only mean safeguarding institutions: the ultimate check on power in any democracy is its citizens. This makes work to improve the information environment and support civic education vital.

Statutory codes of conduct could require social media platforms to mitigate democratic risks, while the government could invest in the provision of high-quality information. The new National Curriculum, to be delivered in English schools from 2028, offers opportunities to improve and expand Citizenship education.

The most significant constitutional changes need careful policy work and wide consultation, to deliver results that last and that meaningfully contribute to trust in the democratic system. For a new government with countless demands on its time and attention, some of these may appear low priority.

But now is the time to begin these reviews, so that detailed proposals can be worked up in time for the drafting of the next general election manifesto. Meanwhile, there are plenty of things the Burnham government could do quickly to meaningfully strengthen the constitution.

The Representation of the People Bill is currently before Parliament. It has already been amended to increase the Electoral Commission’s independence, but more could be done. The legislation on removing peerages promised in the King’s speech could be broadened to address House of Lords appointments.

Many reforms can be delivered without legislation. Some would require standing order change – for example, to increase MPs’ influence over the Commons agenda, and more fairly allocate Commons time between opposition parties.

Others can be done by the government alone. Civil servants are working on a new edition of the badly outdated Cabinet Manual, and a process for future regular updating could be established at the same time. A duty to uphold democratic health could be included in the BBC’s promised permanent charter. The government’s lobbying transparency releases could be improved, as recently recommended by the Ethics and Integrity Commission.

Burnham has advocated a more collaborative approach to politics, and a less centralised state. Our proposed reforms offer practical ways of delivering those goals – and of safeguarding the UK constitution.

Lisa James is a Senior Research Fellow at UCL’s Constitution Unit

2 min read12 min

Host Alain Tolhurst also takes a look at Andy Burnham’s first few days in Number 10, how his Cabinet picks and his initial policy blitz are going down with his Labour colleagues, as well as the voters, and what else we can expect from our latest Prime Minister alongside two colleagues: deputy editor of our sister title The House magazine, Sienna Rodgers, and editor at PoliticsHome, Adam Payne.

The trio discusses the thinking behind the ministerial appointments, as well as what was going on behind the scenes in Westminster this week, plus how the Burnham government is keen to avoid the mistakes of the Keir Starmer administration in its first weeks in office. 

They also look at what the new Prime Minister might have planned for the summer, with the government already facing questions about how it will fund its cost-of-living package.

As well as trying to oppose the new Labour government, the Conservatives are looking to close the gap on Reform UK in the polls. Stride was in bullish form, saying he thinks Nigel Farage’s party has been on a “steady decline” since last autumn.

“And it’s quite conceivable that decline will continue,” he told the podcast. 

“What has underpinned that souffléing down of Reform is the fact that the firework display, the shimmy of the sequin dress, the music, the razzmatazz, it can’t last forever before people say I’ve heard that before, play me another song.”

The Rundown is presented by Alain Tolhurst, and is produced and edited by Ewan Cameron for Podot

• Click here to listen to the latest episode of The Rundown, or search for ‘PoliticsHome’ wherever you get your podcasts.