A reception unseen since the vaccine bounce

The verdict came from a group of people who voted Labour in 2024, some of whom had drifted to Reform, the Conservatives and the Greens during the Starmer era, convened on a Thursday night. Their response to Andy Burnham's conference speech was the most positive reception recorded for any politician since Boris Johnson at the height of his Covid-vaccine bounce. Participants' names have been changed.

Neil, a geography teacher, put it most fully:

The rest of the group reached for similar themes:

• •Megan, a talent manager, said: "He feels more relatable to people from a working-class background"
• •Simran, another teacher, said: "He's obviously better than the others in the short timeframe that he's been in his position"
• •Linda, who works in banking, said: "He actually sounds like a person that's there, not just for himself, but for all of us"

When a clip was played in which Burnham spoke emotionally about his father's death, the group - in contrast to some online criticism - appreciated a politician willing to show his human side.

Turning the page on the Starmer years

The mood changed when the group turned to Burnham's predecessor, the former prime minister Keir Starmer. Craig, a contracts manager, called the period from Labour's election win until Starmer left "just a shambles from the moment they won the election up until he left". None of the group felt it would have been better to keep the former PM in place. Most had picked up at least something from the prime minister's speech and liked what they had heard.

Brexit: a disaster, but rejoining splits the room

On Burnham's pledge to revisit the UK's relationship with the EU, there was an overwhelming feeling Brexit had been a disaster. Most in this group had voted to remain. Even Darren, a field manager at a utility company who had voted Leave, felt cheated over what he had been told before the Brexit vote: "The amount we got told we were putting into the EU, I thought we could stand on our own two feet".

For most, the worry was less the economic impact of Brexit than a sense of isolation in an increasingly dangerous world, with a less reliable US.

On the specifics of rejoining, the group turned far more cautious:

• •Many thought rejoining on the old terms would be a no-brainer, but participants feared Britain would end up with a worse deal as punishment
• •Neil, who voted remain, said Britain would be badly treated: "I voted remain, but we'll get utterly shafted if we rejoin … what do they gain?"
• •Others described feeling 50/50 and nervous about where Britain would end up

The report's conclusion: Burnham's biggest fight won't be in the principle but the details.

Backing care, balking at tax

The more controversial pledge was that the triple lock would be reformed to pay for social care. The rise in wages was the least salient part of the lock: most of the group felt their wages had long lagged inflation, so pensioners would not really lose out. Linda said her salary has not been increasing that greatly. Care reform is a real priority, and Tariq, who works in the pharmaceutical industry, called it an example of how "sometimes you need to take hard decisions".

The mood shifted after the group was played a clip of the Unite leader Sharon Graham opposing the move: some participants feared pensioners would lose out, while others asked whether the highest earners could fund it instead. It turned more negative still after the group read analysis by the former Institute for Fiscal Studies chief Paul Johnson, whose verdict was that triple lock reform would not pay for a national care service in the near term and so taxes would have to rise.

Faced with that, the group balked:

• •None of the group were willing to pay more taxes, personally, for care
• •Simran warned that further income tax rises would push people to migrate: "If the income tax increases any more, you're going to find people are going to migrate"
• •Joanne, who works in dentistry, said: "I feel rather selfish about it because I don't want to pay any more tax" - because, she noted, people cannot afford a decent life

In the wider budget discussion, participants who felt Burnham had done some "small things" wondered whether it would all be, as Linda put it, "robbing Peter and paying Paul".

The report's own verdict: Burnham is impressing the voters who put Labour into office in 2024 and has earned his party a rehearing that Starmer simply could not, even if big questions remain on the details. He can be happy with the reception for Tuesday's speech, but definitely cannot afford to rest on a post-conference glow in the battle for public opinion on his plans.