ERA OF THE 'KING OF THE NORTH'

The change of prime minister in the United Kingdom in the summer of 2026 became one of the most unexpected events in British politics in recent years. Less than two years after the Labour Party's convincing victory in the parliamentary election, Keir Starmer was forced to resign under pressure from his own parliamentary party.

Andy Burnham became the new British prime minister on July 20, 2026, identifying as his immediate priority the restoration of trust in the Labour Party and an end to the sharp decline in its public support.

Catholic and 'King'

Incidentally, Burnham became the country's first Catholic prime minister in history. He grew up in a family with Irish Catholic roots, was educated in Catholic schools and has repeatedly stressed that Catholic social teaching had a significant influence on the formation of his political views. At the same time, Burnham describes himself as a 'cultural Catholic' rather than a strictly practising believer.

As is well known, Labour's victory in 2024 was largely a consequence of British society's fatigue with the Conservatives' many years in power. Keir Starmer succeeded in convincing voters that he was able to restore stability to British politics after a succession of prime ministers and internal crises within the Conservative Party. However, once in office, the new government faced a far more complicated reality. Economic growth remained weak, public finances required strict budgetary discipline, the cost-of-living crisis continued to put pressure on the population, and the National Health Service suffered from a chronic shortage of resources.

At the same time, public concerns about illegal migration and border security were growing. Against this background, the popularity of Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage, was rising rapidly, and the party was increasingly successful in attracting the protest electorate. It should be recalled that Farage is the architect of Brexit, while Starmer tried in every way to convince the British people of the mistake of that step. In this sense, Reform UK's success can be seen as one of the clearest indicators of the political crisis in which Labour found itself.

As a result, by the middle of 2026, a conviction had formed within the Labour Party that keeping Starmer at the head of the government posed serious risks for the next parliamentary election.

Against this background, the choice of Andy Burnham was not accidental. For almost two years he had remained outside national politics, serving as mayor of Greater Manchester. Unlike most ministers in Starmer's government, Burnham was not associated with the cabinet's unpopular decisions and bore no political responsibility for the fall in the party's ratings.

Moreover, his position as a regional leader became an important political advantage. During his years leading Manchester, Burnham acquired a reputation as an effective administrator who managed to secure additional powers for the region and repeatedly entered into public disputes with central government in defence of the interests of Northern England.

In other words, the party was given the opportunity to bring to power a politician who was simultaneously part of the Labour establishment but was perceived by the public as a relatively 'new face'. Although Burnham is no newcomer to politics, around fifteen years ago, when Labour was in power, he held the post of Secretary of State for Health of the United Kingdom.

Despite the fact that Starmer and Burnham belong to the moderate wing of the Labour Party and both advocate an active social role for the state in the economy, their approaches to implementing this policy differ substantially. Andy Burnham represents a completely different type of British politician. In recent years, his political career has been closely linked to regional government, which shaped a different style of communication with the public. He takes part in public discussions far more freely, appeals to social issues more often and uses emotional argumentation much more actively. This is why many British observers describe him as a politician with a far better feel for public sentiment than Starmer.

An interesting detail. During his years leading Greater Manchester, Burnham gained nationwide fame and the unofficial nickname 'King of the North'. It stuck to him during the pandemic, when he openly opposed the central government, seeking additional support for Manchester and other northern areas of England.

Reforms

Burnham has for many years advocated the transfer of a significant share of powers to large urban agglomerations and regions. His political philosophy is based on the view that excessive centralisation reduces the effectiveness of public administration, whereas expanding the powers of Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Leeds and other major cities can stimulate economic development and reduce regional disparities.

In this regard, one of the central elements of the new political agenda has become not so much an increase in public spending as the redistribution of administrative powers within the country.

Another direction of policy adjustment has been a change in political strategy towards the rapidly growing Reform UK. In Burnham's view, it is almost impossible to compete with right-wing parties on their own ground. The Labour Party should therefore focus on those issues that have traditionally formed the basis of its electoral support—the development of the National Health Service, the construction of affordable housing, improving the quality of public services, raising living standards and reducing regional inequality.

In effect, Burnham is expected to solve two tasks at once: to restore the trust of Labour's traditional electorate and, at the same time, to return to the party the image of a force capable of offering a positive programme of development, rather than merely reacting to crises. In the very first days after taking office, Burnham tried to demonstrate a change in political style. In addition to promises to lower the cost of living, the government announced the abolition of a number of charges in household electricity bills, the retention of the maximum bus fare, and a reduction in the tax burden on pubs, clubs and concert venues. It also presented a national programme to combat homelessness based on the Housing First principle.

At the same time, Burnham announced his intention to pursue regional policy more actively, expanding the powers of local authorities and stimulating the re-industrialisation of the country's northern regions. In this way, the new prime minister is seeking to show that the Labour Party is returning to solving citizens' everyday problems and is once again capable of offering a long-term positive development agenda.

The success of this strategy will depend on whether the new government can achieve tangible results faster than protest sentiment consolidates definitively around Reform UK.

Foreign policy unchanged

In foreign policy, one should hardly expect a radical revision of the British course. Regardless of the change of prime minister, London maintains continuity on key issues of national security, since the main directions of foreign policy are traditionally formed on the basis of a broad cross-party consensus. The arrival of Andy Burnham is therefore more likely to lead not to a change in the United Kingdom's strategic goals but to an adjustment of certain emphases and of its diplomatic style.

One of the main priorities of the new government is likely to be the restoration of closer relations with the European Union. Unlike the Conservatives, Labour does not view Brexit as a tool for further political separation from continental Europe.

At the same time, one should not count on the United Kingdom returning to the EU. Public opinion remains too polarised, and reopening the question of membership could only strengthen the position of Reform UK and other Eurosceptic forces. The most likely scenario is therefore a gradual expansion of cooperation with Brussels in trade, science, defence, energy and migration policy without revisiting the outcome of Brexit.

Relations with the United States will be of particular importance for the new government. Despite the traditionally allied character of the Anglo-American partnership, the interaction of Keir Starmer's cabinet with the administration of Donald Trump can hardly be described as cloudless. Disagreements periodically arose on trade policy, the climate agenda, approaches to European security and methods of resolving a number of international crises. Although the strategic character of the bilateral alliance was never called into question, political dialogue was often accompanied by mutual criticism and a noticeable difference in positions.

On the Ukrainian question, no fundamental changes should be expected either. The United Kingdom will almost certainly maintain its course of comprehensive military and political support for Kiev, viewing the Russian-Ukrainian conflict as one of the key challenges to European security.

At the same time, somewhat greater attention may be paid to the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine, long-term security guarantees and the search for diplomatic mechanisms of settlement after the end of the active phase of hostilities.

The Middle East agenda will prove somewhat difficult for the new government. Keir Starmer's cabinet was criticised both by supporters of Israel and by pro-Palestinian organisations, and Burnham will have to seek a more balanced approach.

As far as Iran is concerned, the new government's room for manoeuvre also remains limited. London is unlikely to revise its tough position on Iran's nuclear programme, the development of missile technologies and the activities of armed groups supported by Tehran in the Middle East. At the same time, Burnham's government will probably be more interested in preventing further regional escalation and in preserving diplomatic channels of engagement, understanding that full-scale confrontation with Iran could cause serious damage to the global economy, energy markets and the security of maritime communications.

Thus, the foreign policy of the new government will, it seems, combine a high degree of strategic continuity with a more pragmatic and less confrontational style of diplomacy. The main feature of Andy Burnham's course, one must assume, will be the desire to strengthen relations with European partners without weakening the alliance with the US, to maintain support for Ukraine while intensifying diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. In other words, it can be argued that what will take place is not a change in the United Kingdom's foreign policy strategy but an attempt to make it more flexible, predictable and oriented towards reducing international tension.