Course correction: Burnham's speech for the history books
George Marshall • UK • 3 minute read
Image: Number 10 / Flickr
Embedded Files
It is not often in the modern world that entire speeches are able to grasp our attention and take us on an emotional journey, let alone paint a picture of what has gone wrong, how, and what can be done to fix it. Social media has meant that we often witness fragments of oratory in isolation or, to blame the speaker; speeches simply lack the gravitas and miss the pressures and sentiments of the moment.
What we saw last Tuesday in Liverpool was different. Not just because of the speaker, as some have been quick to point out, but because the entire speech captivated those across the political spectrum for various reasons. It had an emotional gravitas that very few speeches hold, and it understood the pressures of the moment and the sentiments that the people on the left had been wanting to hear from the Labour Party for years. “The British right talk about taking back control… never let them forget they are the ones that gave it away in the first place” will be a line that goes down in history, and this speech will be looked upon fondly as a pivotal moment that made us in the party proud to be a part of it again.
Image: Number 10 / Flickr
The speech largely succeeded because it offered something that has often been missing from modern political discourse: a sense of purpose and a narrative that connected economic decline, regional inequality, democratic frustration, and national renewal into a single narrative. Burnham’s speech was the epitome of moving away from managerial politics to pragmatism to solve the clear issues of Britain’s decline.
In a world of populism from both the left and the right, we must also understand the value of Burnham’s pragmatic policy approach, which was conveyed in immense detail. Burnham, across a plethora of sectors, put forward a believable, robust plan for how Britain can be changed for the better. Recognising that we have been going wrong since the 1980s, Burnham sought to turn the tide by bringing back public essentials into public control: water, energy, travel, and care were covered, showing the Prime Minister's breadth ad seriousness about reversing the privatisation of public goods seen under Thatcher.
Additionally, central to the speech was Burnham’s announcement that the triple lock would be transformed into a double lock in 2030, with the savings from that going towards a new National Care Service. With this, not only does it show Burnham is serious about making changes, but also willing to make controversial decisions too, separating him from many of his predecessors.
Is now the time to call an election to ride that wave of optimism and pass the things said in the speech?
Turning to how it was delivered, what we saw last Tuesday was also an example of the impact that politicians showing themselves to be human can have. Burnham’s tears, whilst coming from a place of grief, were the most uplifting part of the speech – a rallying cry (literally) of how we are all in this together, of how we must strive to fulfil the utopia generations before us dreamed of, and how we can create a country where we can all be proud of. Burnham, in those words about his father alone, displayed more purpose, passion, drive, and desire to change this country for the better than Starmer ever did. A change of leader is sometimes quoted to be all that has happened in this party – whilst somewhat true, that change brought with it something else: purpose. It is why we feel Burnham is more willing to make change.
What we saw last week was a piece of oratory for the history books. I am certainly envious of many of my peers who were in the room and witnessed this party changing live, seeing the impact that speech had (bringing people I never expected back to the party). My concern now is, can it be replicated when we need it, or is now the time to call an election to ride that wave of optimism and pass the things said in the speech? That is a different debate but certainly one worth considering.
Edit log
•Published: 06/10/26
Google Sites
Report abuse