Andy Burnham has formally assumed leadership of the Labour Party, a development that one columnist suggests signals a potential return to the economic policies of the 1970s. In an opinion piece, Leo McKinstry characterizes Burnham's victory speech as a "1970s tribute act," evoking themes reminiscent of "Ain't No Taxes High Enough" and "Strike Fever."
Mckinstry criticizes Burnham's self-proclaimed significance of his ascent, quoting the new leader's assertion that it is "the most important event of the last 40 years in British politics." Burnham's promise to be a leader "for the North and South, for the East and West" and to draw strength "from the people" is viewed by the columnist as a precursor to increased officialdom, state interference, and higher taxation.
The article draws a stark parallel between Burnham's perceived political direction and the economic conditions of the 1970s, a period when Britain was referred to as "The Sick Man of Europe." It highlights the high inflation rates of that era, reaching 27% in August 1975, and the subsequent need for a bailout from the International Monetary Fund in 1976. The piece also references the high tax rates of the time, including a top rate of 83% on salaries and 98% on investment incomes.
Mckinstry posits that Burnham views the 1970s as a "political golden age" that was disrupted by Margaret Thatcher's policies in the 1980s. Burnham's argument, articulated at a local government conference, is that "Britain has been on the wrong path" over the last four decades due to de-industrialization, privatization, deregulation, and austerity, which he claims have been detrimental to the North of England.
The column contends that Burnham's "shallow, emotive socialism" resonates with Labour's rank and file but is "hopelessly flawed and profoundly irresponsible." The author expresses concern that a wealth tax, a policy Burnham has supported, could deter business leaders and stifle wealth creation. McKinstry argues that the fundamental problem in British corporate life is not a small state but an overly large one, with the tax burden at its highest since the 1940s.
Concerns are raised about Burnham's economic understanding, with a reported confession that he "did not know much about economics" when serving as Chief Secretary to the Treasury. His perceived desire to be universally liked is seen as an impediment to making difficult decisions and presenting clear, costed policies. The article notes a lack of detail in Burnham's stated plans for office and his undisclosed Cabinet appointments, which it suggests fuels an impression of indecision.
The policy of decentralizing power to local assemblies and mayors is also scrutinized, with the article comparing it to the unsuccessful Regional Economic Planning Councils of the 1960s and Regional Development Agencies of the 2000s, suggesting these often result in increased bureaucracy rather than genuine democratic change.
The piece concludes by questioning Burnham's suitability for leadership, drawing a historical parallel to Winston Churchill's doubts about his successor, Anthony Eden, who proved to be a "disaster." McKinstry suggests that Burnham's unexamined path to leadership has not allayed doubts about his capabilities.