Italy has had nearly 70 governments since the end of the Second World War, Giorgia Meloni forming the 68th in 2022. With Italian governments lasting an average of 13 months, the country had become a joke.
Now it’s the UK’s turn to become a laughing stock, with six prime ministers having resigned since 2016 – Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and now Starmer.
Labour’s been in trouble for a while now, but it was the disastrous May local elections that sparked serious internal discontent, several resignations, and a push for Sir Keir Starmer to step down.
The pressure became too great to ignore after Andy Burnham, now former Manchester mayor, won the Makerfield by-election and was sent back to Westminster.
So, what next?
Labour as a government isn’t going anywhere. But who will replace Starmer and secure the keys to No 10? While a number are considering running for the role, it’s almost certain, as BDN went to press, it will be Burnham.
Procedurally, Labour’s ruling body will determine the timetable, but nominations for party leader could close on 16 July with an uncontested election leading to a ‘coronation’ a few days later. But, of course, if there’s a runoff, the process will take longer.
A Burnham government will be ‘interesting’ for the country and business. Worryingly, a survey by Trends Research of 2000 SME owners found that 80% were fearful about the implications of Burnham for their businesses, a striking figure in a sector that accounts for more than 5.5 million firms and more than 99% of the UK business population.
The problems they foresee stem from his record of intervention and redistribution, as his name has been linked to policies including a local land tax and a tourist tax on overnight stays.
Burnham is known to be keen on public ownership of utilities and transport as a route to lowering bills. He would seek to lower the benefits bill by somehow getting more into work, but it’s hard to see how that would work if employment taxes and changes to employment law aren’t tweaked to be more employer-friendly. On the former, Burnham considers Rachel Reeves’ increase in Employer’s National Insurance to have been the wrong move. However, that doesn’t mean that he will overturn it.
On land tax, Burnham considers it – along with the Institute of Fiscal Studies – an efficient way to tax wealthier landowners while removing the regressive nature of council tax.
Business Rates for pubs and music venues may be cut by 20%, a move funded by an increase in rates on out-of-town warehouse-style businesses. At the same time, he would seek to raise the threshold before Business Rates apply, taking many small high street shops out of the regime entirely.
Fundamentally, Burnham is a fan of preventative medicine, where governments don’t spend willy-nilly but instead, spend to tackle the root causes of problems, whether that be through more social housing, healthcare or jobs that don’t need a university degree.
Regardless, small firms – any firm for that matter – trying to contain the effects of government taxes and levies will see the prospect of a treasury needing more money as a serious concern.
But beyond all of this, Starmer’s successor will need to do what Starmer and his acolytes couldn’t do: find a way to connect with the public and offer a message of hope rather than doom, gloom, and ever-increasing taxes. Starmer and Reeves were – are – miserable individuals. Lurching from one crisis to another, stating policy only to reverse it (16 times), Starmer was time-stamped within months of becoming prime minister. Burnham, if he wins, needs to be more plausible.
Of course, there may be other contenders, individuals who either want the job or who throw their names into the ring just to disrupt the Burnham coronation. Given the UK’s recent past, gamblers are advised to go short.