Right-Wing Media Watch: Burnham’s cabinet has barely begun, but the meltdown is in full throttle

Michael Take, the satirical ‘former Tory MP’ account that the Daily Mail once famously mistook for a genuine politician while reporting on the supposed benefits of Brexit, summed up the mood of the right-wing press perfectly this week.

Alongside the Mail‘s front page showing Andy Burnham with his hands clasped in prayer beneath the headline, “Let’s pray he knows what he’s doing,” Take wrote:

“Well done the Daily Mail! Burnham must be held to account for the failures of his regime so far. His removal of VAT from electricity bills has already come far too late and could have been done yesterday. If he hasn’t solved the cost of living crisis by Friday then he must go.”

Indeed, Burnham had barely assembled his Cabinet before the newspapers were treating his premiership as though it had already failed.

And as for the Cabinet itself… The reaction to Angela Rayner’s return as housing secretary came as little surprise. Regular RWW readers will remember the relentless campaign waged against her during her previous time in the role.

Right on cue, Telegraph personal finance editor Matt Coulson declared: “Bringing back Angela Rayner is Andy Burnham’s first mistake.”

He argued that her appointment “raises difficult questions about standards,” pointing to the stamp duty dispute that ultimately led to her resignation and which the Telegraph itself helped uncover.

HMRC, of course, concluded Rayner had not deliberately avoided tax. She paid what was due, and the matter was resolved.
Then came Ed Miliband, the right’s favourite political punchbag.

“It’s a disgrace that Ed Miliband is Foreign Secretary,” thundered the Spectator‘s Stephen Pollard.

Pollard described Miliband’s appointment as “the most nauseating appointment of my lifetime,” arguing that Miliband’s decision as Labour leader to oppose military intervention against Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria in 2013 represented “the single most amoral decision of any mainstream party leader in living memory.”

Of course, this rather ignores the fact that it was Cameron’s government at the time which had to forego intervention in the face of parliamentary opposition following disastrous interventions into Iraq and Libya.

Readers may agree or disagree with Miliband’s judgement over Syria. But presenting a political disagreement as proof that someone is inherently unfit to serve as foreign secretary illustrates how much of the coverage is driven by outrage rather than analysis.

Although, it could be worse, thank God, Miliband’s not chancellor,” as the Mail cried.

Then there was the coverage of lesser-known Miatta Fahnbulleh, the Liberian-born Peckham MP who is now secretary of state for energy and net zero.

“Why Net Zero opponents fear we’ve gone from Mad Miliband to Miatta, even madder than Miliband!” screamed the Mail.

Rather than scrutinising policy, the beginning of the article recounts an awkward television moment in which Fahnbulleh briefly attempted to leave a Newsnight studio through the wrong exit, prompting laughter from those present. The piece then goes on to criticise Fahnbulleh consistent advocation for ambitious investment in green infrastructure. It highlighted her support for spending around five percent of GDP on green investment in 2019 and her calls for significant funding to accelerate Britain’s transition to net zero while supporting climate finance for developing countries.

In other words, the secretary of state for energy and net zero supports investing in green infrastructure and achieving net zero.

Quite the scandal.

One cannot help noticing that Fahnbulleh also embodies several of the characteristics that reliably attract hostility from the right-wing press. She is Black, left-wing, female, highly accomplished, the only MP from Labour’s 2024 intake to receive a full Cabinet post, and a close political ally of Ed Miliband, described by the Mail as a “fervent Ed Miliband loyalist.”

Whether those factors consciously influence coverage is impossible to know. What is undeniable is that politicians fitting this profile often find themselves subjected to a level of scrutiny and ridicule that extends well beyond legitimate policy criticism.

Then there was Matthew McGregor’s appointment as Downing Street’s director of political strategy.

McGregor previously served as director of campaigns and communications at Hope Not Hate. 

That was enough for UnHerd to splash: “Andy Burnham’s embrace of Hope Not Hate is deeply concerning.”

The article argued that Hope Not Hate presents itself as a non-partisan charity while functioning in practice as “a Labour-aligned campaign operation.”

Barely days into Burnham’s premiership, the verdict has already been written. Every appointment is a disaster, every minister a threat, every policy announcement proof of national decline.

If this is the standard being set in week one, it raises an obvious question: if the outrage machine has already reached maximum volume before the government has truly begun, what exactly is left to turn up when there are real decisions to scrutinise?