Labour lost the general election because its approach to deficit reduction was only “slightly less severe” than that of the Conservative party, Andy Burnham has said.
Speaking ahead of the launch of his manifesto for the Labour party’s leadership election on Thursday, Burnham said he did not agree with fellow Labour MP Jon Cruddas, who was asked by the party’s leadership to investigate the reasons for Labour’s electoral defeat and concluded on Wednesday that “the Tories didn’t win despite austerity, they won because of it”.
“It’s absolutely crucial to have a plan for the public finances and the deficit, of course it is,” Burnham told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “But I think the problem we had at the last election is that we looked like we were just going to do something slightly less severe than the government, than George Osborne.
“I believe the way we would have won people over would be to have had a genuine alternative to Osborne’s punishing austerity.”
Burnham’s manifesto will advocate handing control over all schools admissions back to local education authorities as part of a reform process that would see the eventual phasing out of academies and free schools.
In a move that goes further than the Labour election manifesto, Burnham will pledge to revitalise comprehensive education as he rejects “the growing market of free schools and academies”.
The announcement by Burnham on education will form the centrepiece of his leadership manifesto, which will be seen as an attempt to reach out to Labour members on traditional themes in the face of a formidable challenge from Jeremy Corbyn.
Burnham announced on Wednesday that he would renationalise the railways “line by line” if he became prime minister, as he promised to end the “fragmentation and privatisation” of the rail system. A special national rail governing body would be set up to encourage public bidding for rail franchises and new rules to ensure that all rolling stock would carry uniform National Rail livery regardless of whether the operating company was in the private sector.
When asked on the Today programme on Thursday how he would fund the policy, he said: “I believe it can finance itself because the money that can be generated would go back into supporting the railway system.”
The Burnham camp took heart from a poll released by the Opinium polling company, which showed the shadow health secretary was the preferred choice among Labour voters. Burnham was on 39%, compared with 24% for Corbyn, 22% for Yvette Cooper and 15% for Liz Kendall.
But senior Labour figures believe that Corbyn is building up an apparently unstoppable momentum among party members and new registered supporters, who can vote in the leadership contest if they pay £3 and sign a statement making a commitment to Labour values.
Burnham told the BBC that Corbyn’s presence in the race had “lifted the debate” and centred it around “bigger ideas”. “My analysis is that life has got harder for many people in the 21st century. The challenges have got bigger, but politics has gone the other way. It’s got smaller, it’s been dealing in gimmicks and soundbites,” said Burnham.
“I think people are looking for something bigger. The Labour party is crying out for a bigger vision it can get behind, it can unite around, and that’s what I’m offering. But my vision has credibility at its heart.”
Burnham will move on Thursday to show that he is prepared to act in a more radical way than Ed Miliband when he outlines plans to phase out academies and free schools.
The Labour party said in its manifesto for the general election in May that it would end the free schools programme, but it indicated that existing free schools and academies would be left alone. The shadow health secretary wants all academies and free schools to be phased out, ensuring that they are replaced by comprehensives under LEA supervision to ensure local control over admissions.
Burnham will say in his manifesto: “I believe in comprehensive education. I will bring forward a new vision to reinvigorate it for the 21st century, based on true parity between academic and technical education. I will restore a local role in overseeing schools, rejecting the growing market of free schools and academies.”
