Prime Minister Andy Burnham's initial appearance in the House of Commons was characterized as "gluey" and "glacial," with observers noting a lack of the typical "sheen" and "cutting, conquering self-confidence" usually displayed by new leaders. The critique suggests that Burnham's delivery was slow, with exchanges stretching significantly longer than anticipated.
During his first Wednesday high noon session, the chamber was filled with expectation, but the atmosphere soon became subdued. Burnham's speaking pace was described as leisurely and his answers largely inconclusive. He was noted to be a "despatch-box dawdler," taking an extended period to articulate his points. For instance, exchanges with Kemi Badenoch lasted 18 minutes, nearly doubling the expected time for the segment, which ultimately extended the session from a planned half-hour to 44 minutes.
This perceived diffidence was attributed to several factors, including his voice, his "ambling, shuffling diffidence," and a potential "terror of the snap and smack of command." Unlike leaders who project authority, Burnham appeared to be "diluting" the hierarchical nature of leadership, which could be a disadvantage in the adversarial environment of Parliament.
Burnham's approach involved reading from "civil service prose" and occasionally looking to the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, for guidance when prompted to speed up. This hesitancy reportedly led to fading enthusiasm among his own party members and a crestfallen reaction from coalition partners. Some Labour MPs were observed to be stretching and stifling yawns during lengthy passages of silence.
In contrast to leaders like Tony Blair and David Cameron, who exuded confidence, Burnham was seen to "entirely lack" this quality. While some may view this as modesty, the article suggests that politicians need to project ideas effectively, and a leader perceived as a "hand-wringer" may face scorn from more assertive colleagues. Notable figures like Chris Bryant and Wes Streeting were described as displaying signs of impatience or disengagement.
His opening remarks, which touched on the Bayeux Tapestry and Labour's record on small-boat crossings, reportedly elicited little reaction. Burnham's tendency to agree with opposition backbenchers and promise numerous meetings, including one with MP Andrew George to discuss a private member's bill, was seen as a sign of his consensus-building approach, but potentially time-consuming for a Prime Minister.
Kemi Badenoch questioned how Burnham intended to fund his numerous promises, but he did not provide specific answers. She suggested that "a prime minister needs to be a leader, not a people pleaser," noting that Burnham had "not said no to a single spending request" and had not clarified whether taxes would rise. Her tone was described as one of patient explanation, akin to a "driving instructor with a gearbox-crunching novice."
Despite stating a desire for "problem solving, not point scoring," Burnham did reiterate points made against the previous Truss government, though his delivery lacked force. The article questioned his ability to handle more formidable figures, such as union leaders or international leaders like "shark Putin."
Following the parliamentary session, Burnham posted on social media about his intention to engage directly with "the people" through a pre-recorded Instagram Q&A, which would be edited by Downing Street. This move was contrasted with the expected behavior of a prime minister who is certain of their policies and leadership.