Vowels, voters and the voice of authenticity: the leadership case for Andy Burnham

You might have thought that my post the other day about Andy Burnham declaring his candidacy for the Labour Party leadership was just a tongue-in-cheek exercise. But the more I think about it, the more I think he would be the party's best bet once Brown has gone.

The likes of Straw, Harman, Darling and Johnson might have been OK as caretakers if Brown had been deposed. But, assuming they lose the election, the Labour torch will surely have to be passed on to the next generation.

In various other posts, I've stressed the importance of British party leaders having an elusive appeal that extends beyond those who normally vote for their party. Thatcher and Blair had it, as did Jo Grimond and Paddy Ashdown for the Liberals, but Gordon Brown doesn't have it (for more on which, see HERE & HERE).

Clinging on to the core vote

Since the advent of 'New Labour', the party's main marketing problem has been how to bring middle class voters on board whilst, at the same time, holding on to trades unionists and the 'core vote'.

Blair's public school and Oxford credentials, coupled with his 'natural charm', were arguably critical in winning over enough Tory voters to see him through three election victories.

But he was also very lucky (and/or shrewd) to have had a supporting chorus of Northern vowel sounds from David Blunkett and John Prescott, senior ministers who sounded like (and appealed to) large swathes of the party's core vote.

Bourgeois intruders in the Labour heartlands

Like Tony Blair, potential leadership candidates such as the Miliband brothers and Ed Balls, not to mention Yvette Cooper (AKA Mrs Balls), all come from highly educated middle class backgrounds - with its potential appeal to waivering Tories (if there still are any).

Something else they also have in common with Blair is that they too were parachuted into safe Northern constituencies that had traditionally always selected and returned trades unionists as their MPs.

But, unlike Blair, they're a bit short on Blunkets and Prescotts to boost the party's appeal to its core voters - with one notable exception:

Andy Burnham, BA (Cambridge): a Labour lad from Lancashire

In marked contrast with the other likely contenders in the Labour leadership stakes, Burnham is the MP for his home town - rather than for somewhere he'd never been to or heard of until being awarded a safe seat by the party's high command.

What's more, his years in the South haven't completely eliminated the authentic Northern vowel sounds that make him sound like 'one of us' to Labour's core vote - whilst his Oxbridge education gives him the middle class credentials of a Thatcher, Blair or Cameron.

Add to that the fact that I've seen commentators refer to him as 'good looking' (*), and have never heard anyone who knows him say anything other than what a nice chap he is - and he may have the Blair 'charm' factor too.

Too nice?

So the main question about him looks like being whether he's too nice to bite the bullet hard enough to go for it, win and do the dirty deeds that will have to be done to put the New Labour show back on the road.

*P.S. Since writing this, my attention has been drawn to this interview with LibDem M.P. Lynne Featherstone, who came second to Mr Burnham in a 'most fanciable M.P.' poll - and who describes him here as "drop dead gorgeous":

Political speeches can still make a big difference - like changing the date of an election

A few days ago, I posted some of the reasons why I think that current British politicians and media underestimate how important speeches can be (the 'Snakes & Ladders Theory of Political Communication').

So today, I was fascinated to see confirmation in the serialisation of a book by Peter Watt, former Labour Party general secretary of the Labour Party, in today's Mail on Sunday of something I'd long suspected - namely that David Cameron's speech at the 2007 Conservative Party conference was critical in deterring Gordon Brown from calling an election (which he announced two days after the speech):

On Thursday, Cameron called our bluff. He made a spectacular speech demanding an end to the weeks of frenzied speculation about the Election. ‘So Mr Brown, what’s it to be?’ he taunted. ‘Call that Election. We will fight. Britain will win.’

A panicky Gordon summoned Ed Miliband, Ed Balls, Spencer, Douglas, Deborah Mattinson – Gordon’s pollster – and Sue Nye – Gordon’s senior adviser and trusted ‘gatekeeper’ – for a crisis meeting.

On Friday morning, Douglas called me. ‘Peter, Gordon’s not going to do it,’ he said quietly. ‘When’s he going to make an announcement?’ I asked. ‘Tomorrow’ (my emphasis).

Given that Labour was 10% ahead in the polls at the time, Cameron's decision to ditch his original script, speak from notes and challenge Brown to call an immediate election was a high risk strategy.

But, in terms of the 'Snakes and Ladders' theory, it was a crucial 'ladder' that paid a handsome dividend to the Conservatives - not just in the favorable media reactions it generated, but in the two extra years it gave the party to reverse the polls in their favour - time they wouldn't have had if Brown had gone ahead and called the election when everyone (including, we now know from Peter Watt's book, the Labour high command) was expecting it.

You can watch the full speech above, or see a BBC report on it with video highlights HERE.

Andy Burnham declares his candidacy for the Labour leadership

Political blogger Guido Fawkes has posted a video with the 'Guy News' take on last week's failed plot against Gordon Brown, the full version of which can be seen HERE.

Given my recent posts about the significance of speakers delaying before starting to speak (e.g. Jeremy Paxman) and pre-delicate hitches (e.g. Gordon Brown), the high spot for me was hearing Andy Burnham, Secretary of State for Health, more or less admitting that he's a candidate for the party leadership.

Suddenly confronted with the choice of saying "Yes" or "No" to the question "You don't want to be prime minister?", he goes for the standard politician's response of saying something other than a straight answer to the question.

But note the delay of one second, and the hitches before starting off again - with a blink and a smile that seem to imply "I know what you're up to but you won't catch me out on that one."

BURNHAM: We've got to get on with the job now of taking the fight to the Tories.

QUESTION: You don't want to be prime minister?

[1 second delay]

BURNHAM: I've got a great job as- (I've the uh-*) - Being health secretary is uh- the best privilege ...

(*Approximate transcription of inaudible words).

'Let there be love' - a case of mistaken identity

Official statement for the benefit of anyone who might have stumbled across the above on YouTube:

1. I am not the artiste.
2. I've never heard of him before.
3. I can't sing either.

Gravity Calling:

However, I do admit, with some considerable pride, that one of my sons is a professional musician, who can be seen and heard here playing keyboards on Flipron's latest album:

... more of which can be enjoyed HERE.

Two more straight answers from Mandelson - about failed coups and the PM's rages

Following up on the recent post about Lord Mandelson's two straight answers to Paxman's questions in the Newsnight interview after the failed coup, I've noticed two more - the meanings of which are quite revealing:

1. Yes, this was another attempted coup and I've saved him again (without having to do a great deal), and
2. yes, the prime minister does go into rages, but not on this occasion.