The plates shift to the north

I had a minor bit part in the development of metropolitan mayors.  I had no prior interest in the subject but was asked to chair a commission on the topic and I think that we produced a well-researched and balanced report that took account of experience outside the UK.

I was invited to a launch event at No.10.  Bozza arrive by bike late and sweating and was rude to Dave Cameron.  Hezza, an enthusiast for mayors, then laid into Bozza.

Dave was very keen on the idea and proposed setting up a committee of elected mayors that would meet at No.10.  He provisionally accepted our proposal of providing a PhD student to monitor its work.  He then delegated implementation to Grant Shapps.   Enough said.

As Andy Burnham headed south in his delayed unsealed Avanti express (with toilet changing facilities) it soon became apparent that rather than Lenin's call for 'all power to the soviets' it was going to be 'all power to the elected mayors.'

The 'King of the North' is proposing to move part of No.10's operations to Manchester.  It is worth reminding ourselves that there is more to the north than Manchester.   Leeds, Liverpool and Newcastle are proud cities and Hull is all too often forgotten.   There are some government offices in York and now in Darlington as well.

It is also worth remembering that the biggest share of tax revenue in the UK is contributed by London and the south-east.   Yet the region also has areas of severe deprivation.  Just think Jaywick Sands in Nigel Farage's constituency of Clacton.

Meanwhile, I would welcome further suggestions for renaming Euston Station:

• Finland Station
• King of the North Station
• Everton Station
• Starmer Halt (his constituency is, of course, named after two tube stations)

Hail the King of the North!

All the available evidence suggests that Andy Burnham is likely to win the Makerfield by-election tomorrow, although turnout could well be low.

The most likely scenario is that cabinet ministers will press Keir Starmer to stand down by September.  The absence of a contest means that Burnham's rather vague policy ideas will not be tested.

It's a big step up from being a city mayor to running a country as Boris found.  Much of the groundwork for the economic success of Manchester was laid by Burnham's predecessors.

Yes, he did sort the buses out, but his clean air and homelessness policies were less successful.

It's been difficult to make sense of his statements during the by-election, but he does not seem to understand the fiscal rules.   One moment he was promising to recompense the 'waspy women' then he realised that there was a £10 billion bill attached.

Professor Ford reckons that he is offering spendthrift vibes, but his policies will be much more cautious. However, voters will then soon be disappointed.

I would concede that Burnham is emotionally intelligent and voters are more inclined to see him as someone 'like us'.  The difficulty is that dealing with complex international issues and running a country is more demanding than being a bloke you would like to chat to over a pint.  If I was Burnham, I would offer to make Starmer foreign secretary for which there are two precedents.

The Spectator was saying last week what a wonderful leader Kemi Badenoch is, so why is an apparently decent Conservative candidate in Makerfield going to get a one to two per cent vote.   The Conervatives could, however, do quite well in Aberdeen South so their focus will be there.

Should I be ashamed of my cabal membership?

For the first time in my life, it has been said that I am a member of a cabal.   I had to look up what it meant and the (AI) definition is not very pleasant: 'A "cabal" is a small, secret group of people who conspire to promote their private interests or gain political power. The term carries negative connotations of intrigue, conspiracy, and exclusive plotting.'

The charge was made in the Financial Times by political scientist Philip Cowley in relation to all members of the Labour Party and their potential role in choosing the next prime minister.

To be fair to Philip, he was making a direct comparison with the similarly elderly and unaccountable Conservative Party membership which chose Liz Truss.   His most interesting point was about the 17 per cent or so of trade union members who pay the political levy and hence also get a vote.  No one knows very much about them, although my hunch would be that they lean left.

Philip didn't say how party leaders should be elected.  The Financial Times published my riposte in which I suggested that perhaps we should go back to the days when the chief whip called in cabinet ministers and asked 'Is it Wab or Hawold?'

On further reflection there is a case for reverting to election by MPs holding the party whip.  They know the candidates and they have to sustain the new leader in the Commons.  There could still be a poll of party members but it would be advisory, avoiding the risks of zealocracy or rule by activists.

Reform voters analysed

An important new study of Reform has been carried out under the supervision of electoral studies guru Sir John Curtice: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/02/reform-uk-support-could-plateau-relies-on-conservative-views-study-finds

After listening to Sir John on Radio 5 this morning, my take home message is slightly different from that of The Guardian.  Yes, as we long suspected, there is a glass ceiling to Reform support, but it may be at a level which could make them the largest party in the Commons which would enable them to conclude a confidence and supply agreement with the Tory rump and the Democratic Unionists.  I have seen 'Conform' at work in Warwickshire.

A key point made by Sir John was that at a time when voters have become increasingly disengaged from parties, a high proportion of Reform voters say they are 'very strong' supporters.  In other words, there is hard core of support.

Why the right wing MSM love Tony

Shortly after he became prime minister Tony Blair gave a speech to plutocrats in New York in which he said that it was his ambition to make Labour 'the natural party of business'.

Blair's latest outburst has all the hallmarks of that orientation.  Both Streeting and Burnham have pointed out that he fails to mention inequality once in his diatribe.  Of course, he has made a fortune through his global advice services, often provided to leaders who fall below the highest standards of probity.   And he is in the pocket of President Trump.  If he was still prime minister we would be fighting alongside the Americans in Iran.   Thanks for Iraq, Tony.

'Radical centrism' is in fact a right wing set of policies based on all power to the technocrats.  Screwing the public sector was a key aim.   A headmistress of a successful primary school was shocked to be told by a uni friend who was a Blair adviser 'we are coming after you people.'

In 1997 I voted for the yogic flyers rather than vote for Tony whom I thought was a slippery customer.

Restore Britain to what?

A YouGov poll suggests that Restore Britain may take seven per cent of the vote in Makersfield.  Reports from canvassing returns suggest they may do even better than that.

Superficially this is good news as it means that Reform's chances of winning are diminished.

However, it also means that perhaps a tenth of voters are prepared to sign up to a programme that says on t-shirts 'Detain, Deport.'

I can accept that some Reform voters are just expressing a general discontent and casting a 'none of the above' vote.

Voting Restore means aligning with hard line xenophobia.   I find it difficult enough to accept that perhaps a quarter of the people I meet, who seem pleasant enough, are prepared to vote for Reform, although I do realise the attraction of the 'both main parties have failed' argument.  (Where do the Lib Dems come into this?)

One positive.  There is lady I know in her mid-sixties who is very pleasant in a poorly paid part-time job whom I thought could be Reform material.   Turns out she thought I might be MAGA.  She can't stand Trump and by extension Farage and is really concerned about what they might do in government.

Euston is the new Finland Station

The arrival of Andy Burnham at Euston Station last week has been compared to that of Lenin at the Finland Station in 1917.  Should he win in Makerfield, even more delirious scenes can be expected as the 'King of the North' arrives to the strains of 'See The Triumphant Hero Comes'.

A likely scenario is as follows:

• Burnham wins in Makerfield, not bigly, but respectably on a low turnout.  The Greens run a token campaign.
• Keir Starmer stands down (there is a case for him being made Foreign Secretary as has happened with two former prime ministers)
• Wes Streeting finds he no longer has 80 supporters and Burnham is introduced to the House by Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband    

I am less impressed by Burnham than many.  I think he has a record as a political chameleon concealing the fact that he is a power hungry opportunist.  He may find himself in trouble with the bond markets.

Even his record as mayor of Manchester is more mixed than is often portrayed.  Yes, he sorted out the buses and made them cheaper, but the homelessness problem has returned (although, to be fair, I am not sure anyone could solve that).    However, voters apparently find him 'approachable'.

I think there is quite a step up from being a successful metropolitan mayor to being prime minister as Boris Johnson found.

Mea culpa, as chair of a commission on elected mayors I am partly responsible, although I think that our report was quite balanced.   I will never forget the subsequent meeting at No.10 when Bozza arrived late, puffing and sweating, only to gratuitously insult Dave Cameron until Hezza told him to shut up.

I will be personally quite relieved if there is a coronation as I did not feel comfortable in the role of the chosen 330,000 who would choose the next prime minister.  However, it was not long ago that the choice fell to MPs and before that the chief whip asked ministers 'Wab  or Hawold'?