Andy Burnham may finally be PM, but he isn’t as powerful as he’d like.
Andy Burnham has Zack Polanski on his mind, and that’s bad for all of us (Image: Getty)
Like every leader, Andy Burnham’s at the mercy of events and the machinations of his rivals. He may be top dog in the Labour Party, and likely to remain so for as long as he can maintain his early bounce. But he can see threats all around him, and not all of them are in Westminster. In fact, the biggest isn’t in Parliament at all. Despite that, Burnham is increasingly dancing to his tune, even rewriting government policy in a bid to see him off.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch is a worry, as she bosses the Commons with her impressive performances at Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs), but voters still haven’t forgiven the Tories for 14 years of failure. Burnham has half an eye on Reform UK, even though the donations controversy has taken some of the wind out of Nigel Farage’s sails. But by far his biggest challenge comes from a man that much of the country has written off as weird and dangerous, but who is never far from Burnham’s mind: Green Party leader Zack Polanski.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Right now, the Greens have created a home-from-home for disgruntled left-wing activists, posing a serious threat to Burnham’s chances of going to the country and winning an election. As a result, it feels like almost every policy decision is being made with Polanski in mind.
The Greens are a clear and present danger because on October 8, Polanski will contest the Holborn and St Pancras by-election, triggered by former Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer standing down as an MP. This is Polanski’s chance to get into Parliament.
Labour is still odds-on to win the seat, but the Greens have seen a surge in support from punters. Burnham isn’t taking any chances, even if it means bending government policy to suit party political purposes. Which shows that despite his grand talk of uniting the country around a “common purpose and positivity”, he’s prepared to get down and dirty when it matters.
This explains why Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband made a big deal of announcing sanctions against Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Under Starmer, Labour lost much of its traditional Muslim vote, because he wasn’t seen as being tough enough on Israel. Burnham wants it back. Even if it means winning praise from Hamas and slapping a regional ally in the face, one whose intelligence agencies have helped stop Islamist attacks in this country.
Labour also risked riling US President Donald Trump, while prominent Republicans have threatened retaliatory measures against Britain. That’s a chance Burnham is willing to take if it helps bring Muslim voters back into the Labour fold. Polanski helped drive that decision too.
And that’s just for starters. It was widely assumed that Burnham would give the go-ahead for North Sea drilling, by approving the Jackdaw gas field and potentially allowing the Rosebank oil to proceed. Miliband was dragging his feet, despite growing fury from the unions, but Burnham was supposed to be taking a more “pragmatic” approach.
The sooner he greenlights Jackdaw the better. That way, home-produced gas could eventually flow into British homes this winter, helping to strengthen domestic energy security as a winter crisis looms. But that would enrage eco-activists after the sweltering summer we’ve just had, and be a gift to the Greens. The assumption is that Burnham will still do it, but only after the by-election is safely in the bag. Again, Polanski appears to be influencing the timing of policy.
Burnham is now terrified of doing anything that may gift votes to the Greens. That may also explain why Chancellor John Healey has deferred setting a date for reaching 3% of GDP on defence until next year, despite the growing threat from Vladimir Putin and the widening war in Iran. It may also explain the PM’s astonishing claim during PMQs on September 9 that “national security can’t come at the expense of social security”. There’s no question which is the priority for the left.
So is Burnham governing for Britain, or fighting to save Labour from the Greens? The answer seems pretty clear. Even if Zack Polanski doesn’t make it into Parliament next month, he’s still driving government policy from the sidelines. And if Burnham goes for a snap election, as many now suspect, he will keep bending the knee to Polanski to grab as much of the Green vote as he possibly can. And to hell with the national interest.
Earl Spencer savaged in brutal BBC interview over Diana claims – ‘Where’s the proof?’.TA
Princess Diana’s brother fiercely defended his upcoming book in his first TV interview.
Earl Spencer insists he’s ‘telling the truth’ about Charles claims
Earl Spencer has delivered a scathing blow in his first TV interview since excerpts of his new book about the death of his sister, Princess Diana, were released. In the upcoming book, titled Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, King Charles III is accused of telling Spencer days after the late Princess of Wales’ death that “we’ll forget her soon enough”, according to quotes from the Daily Mail. On Friday (September 18), the author sat down with Laura Kuenssberg for his first TV interview, in which he insisted he is “telling the truth” about the explosive claims.
He told the broadcaster: “I can tell you here and now those are exactly the words he said. I’ve only ever had two calls on the line with Prince Charles at any stage of my life. I was hyper alert to what he was saying, and those are precisely the words that he said, and I promise that to you now. Genuinely, that is what he said. I don’t hear him saying he didn’t say that.”
Earl Spencer sat down with Laura Kuenssberg for his first TV interview ahead of his upcoming book (Image: BBC)
“He went ballistic, would be the right term. He started really going for my family as a whole in terms of their sense of duty not being adequate enough, and ranted for a while, I have no idea how long, but it was a significant period, and I just listened.
“And then he stopped, and I thought, ‘Ah, now he’s going to pull himself together and say something more appropriate’. And then he said, ‘We’ll forget about her soon enough’.” When he was asked about the “unprecedented” statement from the palace, Charles said: “Well, is he furious?
“Is he furious or is he embarrassed? They’ve sort of smudged that one, haven’t they? They’ve said that recollections may vary.” When Laura pressed him on whether he had the evidence to support his allegations, he added that he had told his family and friends at the time what had been said “because it was so monstrous”.
The bombshell tell-all book is set to hit shelves next week and will reopen the events leading up to and following Diana’s untimely death, written from the perspective of her own Spencer family. Shortly after the excerpt made headlines, a spokesperson from Buckingham Palace issued a strong rebuttal to the claims.
Diana’s brother says Charles ‘went ballistic’ in phone call after her death (Image: BBC)
It read: “While we do not comment on books as a matter of principle, His Majesty is mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgement and colour memory in ways others do not recognise, even many years after such a loss.” The King, Prince William and Princess Catherine did not make any remarks on the allegations as they carried out royal engagements on Thursday afternoon (September 17).
The Duke of Sussex has also not spoken out about his uncle’s book, and its reflections on his parents’ relationship, when he was asked by reporters while attending the inaugural Invictus Spirit Awards in London. Shortly after the interview aired, viewers flocked to social media to share their thoughts online, with one user penning: “Why has the BBC even given Earl Spencer the time of day?
“This book is going to be a best-seller. Money, money, money. Let’s hope all the money made from the book goes to charity.” Another argued: “He’s fighting for his relevance. Silly man,” as a third agreed: “Left it a bit late to come out with this. Does Althorp House need a new roof or something?”
Another chimed in with: “Here we go. His five minutes of being in the spotlight. Making a few bob out of his dead sister. Not a nice man, me thinks.” A fifth quipped: “Someone is desperately trying to plug a book…”