Heraldo de Madrid - Quentin Letts Criticizes Andy Burnham’s PMQs Performance and Ten-Year Plan

Columnist Quentin Letts has issued a sharp critique of Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s performance during his sixth session at Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs), describing the leader as "passive, indecisive, [and] bland." In his commentary, Letts suggested that Burnham’s perceived lack of decisive leadership was significant enough to warrant external assistance in drafting the government’s strategic agenda.

Writing from the perspective of a political observer, Letts noted that the chamber began to empty well before the conclusion of the session, indicating that Members of Parliament no longer found the Prime Minister riveting. While acknowledging that Burnham’s supporters view him as an empathetic "people-pleaser" with his heart in the right place, Letts argued that these traits have rendered him a "bore" who avoids substantive policy detail.

The column questioned what drives Burnham’s political philosophy, asking, "What does he believe? What makes him angry? Why did he topple Sir Keir Starmer? How will he alter taxes and spending?" Letts concluded that after six PMQs, the public knew no more about these issues than when Burnham first entered Downing Street in July following his ascent to power.

Letts described Burnham’s demeanor during the session as one of "indecision [that] encases him," serving a protective function against the outside world. The Prime Minister was depicted as absorbing criticism without offering robust counter-arguments, moving his head slowly from side to side while listening. Letts noted that the only moment Burnham appeared engaged was when discussing buses; otherwise, he was characterized as a "blunt pencil" and a "blob of boneless chicken."

A focal point of the critique was the opposition’s scrutiny of Burnham’s Ten-Year Plan. Letts reported that Conservative MP Kemi Badenoch challenged the Prime Minister on whether the government was in such disarray that it had hired the Boston Consulting Group to help write the plan. According to the column, Burnham smiled and shuffled to the despatch box, mumbling about his determination to show leadership but failing to deny that consultants were involved in drafting the document.

Letts criticized Burnham’s response as "apologetic," noting that he used excessive filler phrases such as "if I might say so" and "if I could just finish the point." The columnist argued that dynamic leaders do not speak in such a manner, contrasting Burnham’s style with that of more efficient premiers.

The commentary also detailed the atmosphere within the House of Commons during the session. Letts described the opposition’s attacks as "uncomfortable sport," noting that Burnham seemed to have little heart for argument. While Badenoch teased the government about its inertia and a muddle over North Sea drilling, Burnham offered no significant retaliation. His best response was a claim that the recent Budget had been "the most popular Budget for a number of years," which elicited a laugh but did not shift the tone of the session.

Letts observed that Labour backbenchers appeared glum and silent, with ministers frowning or gazing at their toes. Northern Ireland Secretary Sir Chris Bryant was described as going through an "agonising process of eating a yawn" while wearing a purple velvet waistcoat. The only frontbencher showing animation was whip Gregor Poynton, who was noted for his perpetually jolly demeanor.

The column highlighted the absence of key figures such as Culture Secretary Lucy Powell and former Prime Minister Ed Miliband, suggesting that Powell may have stayed away after facing criticism in recent television interviews regarding a 2015 interview Miliband conducted with Russell Brand. Letts concluded that Burnham left the chamber alone after a "bloodless session," attempting to pat the Speaker on the arm only to receive no acknowledgment.

Throughout the piece, Letts maintained that despite Burnham’s efficiency in ousting his predecessor, he remains remarkably docile and uncontentious, lacking the bite or wit expected of a prime minister.

J.Lozano--HdM