Burnham presses wholesale-change argument as Labour conference looms

Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham openly questioned Keir Starmer’s strategy for turning the country around, telling The New Statesman that Labour needs wholesale change and that the party has been run in a divisive way. He stopped short of ruling out a leadership bid, saying he would be happy to play “any role” while criticizing the Prime Minister’s approach as the party gears up for its conference this weekend. Burnham’s comments underscore a growing debate inside Labour about direction, unity and the tempo of reform as polls show the party struggling in national surveys.

To be clear, Burnham framed the issue not as a palate-cleanser for Westminster politics but as a practical plan for governing. “To me, the issue of the conference is not who is the deputy leader [or] who is leader. The issue is: where is our plan to turn the country around? This kind of challenge... cannot be met by a very factional and quite divisive running of the Labour Party,” he told the magazine. His remarks, coming ahead of Labour’s annual gathering, positioned the Manchester mayor as a potential alternative voice within the party, should there be broad appetite for change.

Burnham described his vision as “aspirational socialism” and argued Labour should reconnect with working-class ambition while recalibrating the party’s approach to power. He called for a rolling back of the 1980s paradigm in utilities such as housing, energy, rail and water, arguing they should be publicly owned again to insulate essential services from market volatility. The blueprint also features higher council tax on expensive London and Southeast properties, targeted income-tax relief for lower earners and a plan to borrow about £40 billion to fund new council homes.

The interview noted that MPs have privately urged Burnham to challenge Starmer, with some saying the time may be ripe for a leadership contest if a clear plan to “turn the country around” is not visible. Burnham said he had heard from colleagues during the summer but framed any decision as his to make in coordination with party processes, not as a unilateral move. He said leaving his job as mayor would be a wrench, but he stressed that the issue is more about the plan than any individual’s ambition.

A leadership bid would require Burnham to resign as mayor, gain a Westminster seat via a by-election, and secure nominations from at least 80 Labour MPs. The party’s executive board would also need to approve a potential candidacy in a seat Labour can realistically win, a hurdle complicated by the presence of Reform UK in opinion polls and the party’s overall electoral outlook. Bridget Phillipson, Education Secretary, told the BBC there isn’t a vacancy for which Burnham would apply, signaling that any formal decision would come through internal channels rather than a public play.

Contemporary observers note the broader context: Starmer has faced scoring polls and a string of policy and political missteps that have fueled questions about Labour’s distance from core working-class concerns. Burnham’s proposals emphasize a shift toward a more interventionist economic strategy and a reform agenda that would appeal to voters disillusioned by business-as-usual politics. He also called for a switch toward proportional representation to enable coalitions of a progressive majority, arguing that governance would require broader cross-party support in a divided political landscape.

Alongside Burnham’s rhetoric, Labour figures have offered cautious responses. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson indicated that there is no vacancy and that leadership decisions would follow party rules rather than public pressure. A backbench member told the Telegraph that Burnham would have “a caucus of support” if he entered the race, while another suggested that Burnham would have to “stop playing footsie” with the party and be explicit about whether he believes the current leadership is capable of delivering change. As the conference approaches, time will tell whether Burnham’s critique translates into a broader push for a new direction or remains a debated stance within Labour’s broader strategic debate.