What We'll Learn From Makerfield

The pollsters, pundits and parties are confused and confusing about Burnham's election chances.

Politics just got simpler for scribblers, idle pundits and the disingenuous BBC; Advance UK is dissolving itself to clear the field for Restore UK. It might provide Restore with some additional political infrastructure too. Membership numbers probably explain the decision. Advance had around 40,000 members; Restore membership is over 130,000 (built in just three months).

While Ben Habib and Rupert Lowe (the parties’ leaders) have not always agreed about stuff, they were both strong members in Reform’s pre-Yussuf days and both fell out with Nigel Farage on matters relating to leadership style and immigration policy. This is not a formal merger, although I suspect many from Advance will join, support or work with Restore – which will help. It’s a good thing for the country and a very principled step by Ben Habib.

If any of those who hope for, or demand, Restore to step aside in Makerfield, unite the right and give Reform a clear run in Makerfield remain in la-la land. Firstly, nominations have closed, so it’s impossible to withdraw or be removed from the ballot paper, even if the candidate dies.

Reform has structural problems, leadership issues and has tilted towards the Tories in terms of MPs and policy—the latter being developed by the excellent-in-all-but-one-way Danny Kruger MP. The one way in which Mr Kruger is not excellent is that he’s part of the problem; the Tory Party delivered much of the national debt, much of the failed infrastructure and, above all, much of the uncontrolled immigration (known as the Boris Wave for a reason). The United Kingdom’s problems are not soluble by policy tweaks; they demand complete structural change. That’s what Reform was originally offering; now it’s playing policy wonk tunes to gain power while leaving the decrepit structure intact. That will solve nothing—fixing the government machine requires major surgery, offered by Restore. You don’t treat cancer with a sticking plaster and an aspirin.

Seeking to attract voters by referring to the risk of Andy Burnham as prime minister merely boosts his credibility while emulating William Hague’s failed rhetoric of “12 days to save the pound” in the 2001 general election. It didn’t work. Blair won and things continued not to get better. Why didn’t it work? Because it was manifest nonsense. If he wins, Burnham becomes an MP. That makes him eligible to fight for the leadership of the Labour Party; it doesn’t make him the winner. Starmer isn’t standing down; there will be a battle. Starmer’s acolytes are already fighting it while Burnham struts, pronounces and poses in Makerfield, part of his Manchester fiefdom.

Moreover, if Burnham wins, he has no new policy mandate. He’s stuck with Starmer’s manifesto (such as it is) unless he calls a general election. He says he won’t, but he would say that; the right to call a surprise, snap election is any prime minister’s most powerful weapon and only a fool would compromise it. Whether a Burnham-led Labour Party would win in 2026 is an open question. They might go for the Sunak option, reasoning that a loss in 2026 will be less total than one in 2029, not least because Reform (and Restore) have yet to be match ready.

Of course, the soaring national debt and the interest thereon increasingly drive policy and constrain everything the Prime Minister does and increasingly occupy his time. (Lack of money is already delaying policy – like the Defence Industrial Plan). Replacing Rachel from accounts won’t change that. Burnham may have a track record as Mayor of Greater Manchester (a political edifice created in 2015). He was once a Secretary of State for Health. He has never worked outside of the Labour Party. He’s the epitome of everything that is wrong with this country’s politics.

Burnham will win if he gets the most votes. There is, or was, a strong Labour vote and a strong Leave vote. Although that baffles some political commentators, a Labour and Leave is quite common—for example, in Wales. The Labour Leave voter is, generally, old Labour, i.e. a pre-Blairite. Like many, if not most, Labour voters (as opposed to party members), they’re probably dischuffed with the current government. They’ll never vote Tory; they might have voted for the pre-teal Tory Reform, but as the Welsh Senedd elections showed, they won’t vote for Teal Tories.

While the Reform candidate is proper Reform and came second to Labour in the general election, it was by 6,000 votes. Josh Simmons (who won) was, like Burnham, also a product of the political machine with a bit of time advising Meta. He’s more Corbyn/Starmer than Blairite—but Corbyn doesn’t attract old Labour either. Turnout was 53% compared to the countrywide 60%; much of the Labour vote stayed home.

Quite possibly the stay-at-home vote is the one that will decide whether the man styled the King of the North (shouldn’t that read King of t’North?) gets to Westminster or not. How they’ll vote is unknowable—and there have been astonishingly few polls conducted. The Survation poll, about the only one published, is based on extensive modelling on a sample size of 504 (from a constituency of some 77,000 voters). That’s a massive extrapolation, fraught with statistical risk. The poll is now old, conducted 18th to 22nd May, before hard campaigning began.

The bookies reveal that many, many more people are betting on Labour than anyone else, with odds of 3 to 1 on (and shortening). Reform is at 3 to 1 against (and drifting). Restore is 25 to 1 and drifting—having been as high as 8 to 1. If you’ve avoided the bookies all your life, an explanation of odds is here . The short version is that among those who punt, Andy Burnham is a very strong favourite and has a 75% chance of winning.. The investors who make up the bond market will have done their own research and already factored a Burnham win into the price of UK debt, which has hovered around 5% since the election was called. Other factors are stronger drivers than the (alleged) Burnham danger. That said, remember that for every bookies favourite who wins on a racecourse, two don’t (which is how bookies make a profit).

While the outcome is uncertain, the Restore vote will be the key measure. It’s the first time it has stood in a Westminster election, so this will establish a baseline. It’s important for Restore, Reform and the country.

If you live in Makerfield, please vote. The country needs the data.

---

If you enjoyed this article please remember that Views From My Cab is a reader-supported publication and subscribe, which costs you nothing but makes the SubStack bots more helpful.

Alternatively you could make a small, one off donation to defray my production costs. I am hugely grateful for every donation. The simplest method is via Buy Me a Coffee.

Buy Me a Coffee