Against the active state
Andy Burnham's government looks ridiculous already. And yet they have faith in their power to direct an "active state" to public benefit. The active state is failing already. It is bound to.
After just a few days, the Burnham government looks a circus.
With weary inevitability, the reshuffle has created resentment and voices off, with rumours of a Starmerite parliamentary faction establishing itself. Reducing the cap on bus fares is a leading announcement, alongside about 86p a week off energy. The new Defence Secretary has rightly apologised when caught making light of early prisoner release. Putting Ed Miliband in the Foreign Office is a smart move I predicted – to get him out of the country so he can’t wind up his colleagues. And we have had our first U-turn: the personal allowance won’t be going up after all.
Some of the new front bench remains tainted by recent scandal. Angela Rayner returns to Cabinet with the housing brief, a year after resigning over an underpaid tax bill on her own flat. Louise Haigh, sacked by Starmer after a fraud conviction came to light, returns as First Secretary of State and effectively deputy prime minister, with a responsibility for ethics.
It is a familiar pattern: attractive but ill-considered and damaging ideas, sometimes rolled back, familiar characters return with a fresh chance to fail, ego over public service and a manifest belief governing is easy.
This is the context in which they seek to further their ideas for an “active state”: more public spending, more official control, more direction of the economy, and more power for mayors and ministers over people freely cooperating.
