A New Dawn, Take 2

Ben Wildsmith 

Prime Ministers used to be special. Granted, they were often useless, but we could at least readily recall which grasping, self-obsessed bag of wind and ego had currently fulfilled his or her obsessional childhood dream.

Now, as we transition from a democracy-led world order to one in which the owners of technology and natural resources rule as feudal barons, the PM could be anyone on any given Wednesday. You might get the call yourself if you can demonstrate enough reach on TikTok.

So here we are, with another shiny-eyed contender arriving at Number 10 tomorrow to restore ‘hope’ and show us his big folder of good ideas. We have been promised a ‘policy blitz’ in the first week, to demonstrate contrast with the outgoing mook’s hit-the-ground-shrugging approach to regime change.

It’s assumed that Andy Burnham will appoint Shabana Mahmood as Chancellor, his outriders haven’t denied it when asked.

If so, the direction taken this week will be far more revealing than is usually the case. Mahmood’s background and experience in law is more suitable for her current role as Home Secretary, and she is said to have preferred to keep that job. So, why is she there?

Early speculation was that Burnham’s choice was between Wes Streeting, who had somehow managed to quieten his own primeministerial hunger, and (menacing music) ‘Red’ Ed Miliband.

Streeting’s standing in the party, however, proved to be less compelling than he had hoped, so his speeches in the City, assuring them of a friendly hearing, were for nought.

Miliband, meanwhile, found that his missteps as leader a decade ago still made for viable ammunition in the press, as does his enthusiasm for climate science.

Mahmood will arrive in the job with a tough reputation from her time in the Home Office, but without any known economic credo.

The question is whether she’s onboard with Burnham’s perceived spendy instincts and is there as a proven operator who can get difficult things done or has been foisted on the new PM to act as a brake on his loftier ambitions.

If she really is Team Burnham, then this week’s policy announcements have the potential to be as historic as their fanfare has suggested.

Of the current crop of Labour politicians, you would pick Mahmood to stare down the bond markets if necessary, and weather the inevitable press battering for doing it.

If, on the other hand, she sees her role as obstructive then the blitz will turn out to be a box of damp fireworks.

For Labour, that outcome would represent an existential threat. Business as usual would enrage an electorate who have been primed to expect a new dawn to counter Reform’s pseudo-revolutionary rhetoric.

Much is at stake and Burnham seems to recognise the urgency of the moment. As systems, both political and economic, come under unprecedented stresses from technology and resource wars, bringing national assets back under democratic control has become as much a matter of security as one of ideological preference.

It will require, however, a programme of spending that looks very different from what has gone before.

Stresses on day-to-day expenditure like pensions are not going to ease, so the government’s job will be to persuade the markets that capital expenditure on infrastructure and recovering assets has been planned well enough to ensure benefits for anyone seeking to invest in the UK.

mis-stepped

Burnham has mis-stepped in his opening overtures to Wales and Scotland. An eagerness to Manchesterise the UK has caused him to misunderstand the structural relationship between Westminster and the devolved governments.

The system was designed by Labour with the expectation that it would remain the dominant political force in Wales. A rogue Welsh Government refusing direction from England was not factored in.

Westminster straying into devolved matters, however,  is illegal under current constitutional arrangements and unless ‘Mr Devolution’ fancies legislating to dilute that, will remain so.

A potential outcome here is that drastically increased English spending on devolved matters like social care will result in cash flowing to the Welsh Government, which can spend it however it likes.

Last week’s row, during which Labour’s two-short-of-a-football-team cohort in the Senedd fabricated an obligation for Welsh spending to mirror that in England, could become a major issue if it is consistently replicated.

Constitutional crisis

If Labour tries to attach strings to Welsh funding from Westminster whilst blocking spending in the Senedd, it will create a constitutional crisis.

Increased English spending could, under the current arrangements, result in the Welsh Government having scope to pursue priorities that do not align with the Westminster government.

Upgrading the English care system could, for instance, provide the Welsh Government with cash to attract businesses to Wales, when they ordinarily would have located in England.

With devolution as his headline promise, it will be interesting to see how committed to the premise Andy Burnham is if, for once, it started working in Cymru’s favour.

---

Get more trusted Welsh news

Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News to see more of our journalism.