Andy Burnham brings something to British politics that has been in short supply under recent Labour leadership: a promise that things can get better, and a manner that makes people believe him. Writing in The Guardian, columnist Polly Toynbee contrasts the new prime minister's public standing with that of his predecessor, Keir Starmer, and argues that the change in tone is both real and politically significant.
Polling cited by Toynbee puts Burnham's favourability rating at +13, making him the only party leader to score above zero. Starmer, by contrast, left office with a rating of -36, having fallen into what Toynbee describes as an electoral death zone from which no leader returns. His unpopularity, she argues, was the direct cause of his removal, a fact that baffled his allies but was evident in the polls throughout his tenure.
The new prime minister's first Commons appearance this week saw him respond to all 125 questions put to him, a display of patience and empathy that Toynbee says his predecessor lacked. She describes Burnham's manner as a natural timbre, a good bedside manner for an uneasy country, and suggests that his warmth is not a political performance but a genuine contrast in style.
Beyond tone, Toynbee points to early policy signals that offer what she calls rare hope. These include the scrapping of VAT on energy bills and the creation of a taskforce to examine political donations. Such measures, she argues, are feelgood policies in the best sense: they address immediate public concerns and signal a different approach to governance.
The columnist also looks ahead to a potentially awkward byelection confrontation in Holborn and St Pancras, where Labour could face Zack Polanski of the Green Party. She notes that Burnham's leadership gives Labour candidates a strong chance in such contests, just as he defeated the right in Makerfield. The implication is that the party's electoral fortunes may be reviving under a leader who understands the importance of public connection.
Toynbee's assessment is not merely a celebration of Burnham's personal appeal. It is an argument about political strategy and public psychology. She contends that a leader who offers credible hope can rebuild trust in institutions and in the possibility of progress itself. The contrast with Starmer, whose government struggled to communicate a positive vision, is central to her case.
The column reflects a broader debate within British politics about the lessons of Labour's recent defeat and the path back to sustained popularity. For Toynbee, the answer lies not in managerial competence alone but in the emotional and rhetorical register of leadership. Burnham, she suggests, understands this instinctively, and that understanding may prove as important as any single policy.