David Dinsmore’s departure suggests tensions over government’s relationship with the Sun, as Burnham wins praise for standing firm

Andy Burnham appears to have received something of a popularity boost this week, for refusing to give interviews to the Sun.

And given the newspaper’s history with Liverpool, Hillsborough and the Labour movement, it’s not surprising that Burnham’s reported decision has been greeted with enthusiasm, particularly in Merseyside.

It also comes as the government’s communications director, former Sun editor David Dinsmore, is preparing to leave his Whitehall post after just over a year.

As first reported by the Observer, Burnham has refused to be interviewed by the Murdoch-owned tabloid, placing him in the company of just one other Labour prime minister who deliberately refused to cooperate with the paper, Jim Callaghan, half a century ago.

Callaghan’s relationship with the Sun became particularly notorious during the 1979 general election campaign, when the paper famously turned his remarks at a hastily convened airport press conference into the headline ‘Crisis? What Crisis?’

What Callaghan had actually said was: “I don’t think other people in the world will share the view that there is mounting chaos.”

Burnham’s reasons for keeping the Sun at arm’s length go back to one of the darkest episodes in recent British political and media history. Hillsborough.

In late August, it was reported that Dinsmore is to step down as the government’s communications director on September 30, after just over a year in the role.

Dinsmore was appointed by then prime minister Keir Starmer in July 2025 with a brief to overhaul communications across Whitehall. Before entering government, he had edited the Sun between 2013 and 2015 and subsequently became chief operating officer at News UK.

His appointment to such a senior government position was controversial among some Labour figures, particularly in Liverpool, where the Sun remains widely boycotted because of its coverage of the Hillsborough disaster.

Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotheram, who is a close friend of Burnham’s, described Dinsmore’s appointment as “insensitive” and said he “shouldn’t be anywhere near a senior government role.”  He said the appointment “sent shivers down my spine.”

Dinsmore’s departure has reportedly been agreed by “mutual agreement.” While there is no evidence that Burnham’s reported refusal to cooperate with the Sun played any role in Dinsmore’s exit, the two stories nevertheless expose an uncomfortable tension between the current government and the newspaper.

The Sun’s relationship with Liverpool has, of course, never recovered from its coverage of Hillsborough.

Its infamous front page headlined “The Truth,” falsely accused Liverpool supporters of urinating on police, stealing from the dead and attacking officers as the disaster unfolded at Sheffield Wednesday’s stadium in 1989, when 97 people died.

The claims were false and subsequent investigations and inquests exposed the extent of the failures by the police and other authorities, while Hillsborough families spent decades fighting for the truth to be recognised.

The Sun has apologised repeatedly for its coverage. But in Liverpool, those apologies have done little to repair the damage.

For Burnham, Hillsborough has become a defining part of his political career.

As a minister in Gordon Brown’s government, he helped drive the creation of the independent Hillsborough Independent Panel in 2009. He has since remained a prominent campaigner for Hillsborough justice and a champion of the Hillsborough Law.

As a member of Ed Miliband’s shadow cabinet, Burnham was among the Merseyside MPs who criticised Miliband for posing for a publicity photograph holding a copy of the newspaper.

When Burnham entered the contest to replace Miliband as Labour leader in 2015, he made clear that he had not forgiven the Sun for its Hillsborough coverage. He also said he would not give the newspaper interviews if he became leader.

So perhaps it’s unsurprising that his latest reported decision has been welcomed by people who do not necessarily agree with Burnham on everything else.

“Good on him. Morals, scruples. 1989 changed mine and many others lives. The victim’s families, LFC, Kenny, Steve Rotheram and Andy Burnham actually did things to expose the cover up,” one person commented.

“Good for Andy. Nobody should be reading that muck spreader,” said another.

“Haven’t made my final opinion on him yet but agree with you here. Well done, @andyburnham,” another wrote.

And another summed up the enduring sense of betrayal felt by many Liverpool supporters: “He played his part in helping the families getting justice and no doubt, like nearly all Liverpudlians and others like me around the country will never forget or forgive what this scummy rag published in April 1989 so fair play to him.”