Is Burnham a left alternative to Starmer?

Wayne Scott, PCS DWP rep, Dundee (personal capacity)

The deepening crisis within Labour has once again exposed the instability gripping British capitalism and all its main political representatives.

Labour returned to government at Westminster hoping to restore its authority after years of Tory chaos, but for broad layers of workers the reality has simply confirmed that changing the party in office does not in itself alter the priorities of the capitalist system.

The same fiscal restraints remain in place. The pressure to make ordinary people pay for capitalism’s crisis remains in place. There has been no serious attempt to reverse decades of decline in housing, local government or the NHS.

It is under those conditions that concern is beginning to spread within Labour itself. Sections of MPs and party officials increasingly fear that Starmer has become an electoral liability. This is reflected in the attempts by Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar to remove Starmer by calling for his resignation in recent months.

Increasing attention has turned towards Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham as a possible “reset” candidate for Labour. Burnham is being presented by sections of the media, parts of the Labour apparatus and the trade union leaderships as someone capable of reconnecting the party with disillusioned working-class voters while still remaining acceptable to the capitalist establishment.

no illusions

But the trade union movement  should have no illusions in Burnham’s ability to transform Labour into a vehicle for working class political representation. Despite attempts to market himself as somehow outside the Westminster bubble, Burnham is a long-standing Labour establishment figure.

He served for years under both Blair and Brown, backed the Iraq war, sat in governments that laid the basis for austerity and supported Starmer’s leadership project after the defeat of Corbynism within Labour.

His differences with Starmer are overwhelmingly about presentation rather than any serious break from pro-capitalist politics.

That is why, alongside occasional left-sounding rhetoric about public control of industry or workers’ living standards, Burnham also stresses his commitment to Labour’s fiscal rules and “economic responsibility”.
In practice that means accepting the same capitalist limits that make genuine change for working class people impossible.

However this does not rule out that under mass pressure, certain concessions to the working class can be granted. And this is a real fear for the capitalist establishment who are concerned that Burnham will be more susceptible to working class pressure than Starmer.

The contradiction cannot be avoided. You cannot seriously tackle poverty, rebuild public services or launch a mass programme of council house building while simultaneously accepting cuts, balanced budgets and the demands of the market.

Similar pressures exist within Scottish Labour. Figures around Anas Sarwar increasingly attempt to present themselves as more in touch with working-class concerns than the Westminster leadership.

But in practice Scottish Labour remains entirely committed to the logic of austerity, meaning that the working class must pay for the bosses crisis.

The crisis facing the ruling class therefore runs far deeper than the fate of any individual Labour leader.

British capitalism has entered a prolonged period of stagnation and decline. Every government faces the same fundamental dilemma. It must defend the interests of big business while attempting to contain growing anger from below.

That contradiction increasingly undermines the authority of all the establishment parties.

Reform UK has been able to gain support not because it offers genuine answers for workers, but because millions feel alienated from a political establishment that appears incapable of improving their lives.

lesser evilism

The response of many trade union leaders, continuing to tie workers politically to Labour as the “lesser evil”, only deepens that crisis.

Backing pro-capitalist politicians who then impose cuts and austerity weakens confidence in the labour movement itself and creates fertile ground for right-wing populist parties like Reform to thrive.

The answer does not lie in replacing Starmer with Burnham or any other Labour figure committed to managing capitalism. What is needed is a fundamentally different political approach.

The trade unions must take the lead in building genuine independent political representation for the working class, rooted in workplaces, communities and struggles rather than defending the priorities of the financial markets or corporate interests.

That means fighting for socialist policies, including public ownership of major industries and utilities, democratic planning of the economy and massive investment in housing and public services funded through taking wealth from the billionaire class.

For socialists, the central task remains the building of an alternative mass workers’ party capable of challenging the entire capitalist establishment and fighting for the socialist transformation of society.