As Andy Burnham was on the verge of becoming prime minister, a headline in the Guardian read: “Burnham promises an end to Labour infighting after taking over as party leader.”

Squint and you might see something else. Like one of those pictures with ambiguous meanings (the space between two outlined faces forming the shape of a vase, and so on).

‘Man who became prime minister thanks to Labour infighting promises to end Labour infighting…’

Blink and it’s a silhouette of two faces again. Blink once more and it’s a vase used as a murder weapon in a game of political Cluedo.

Since actually becoming prime minister yesterday, Burnham has promoted his allies (usual political behaviour) and seemingly pushed aside anyone closely aligned to Sir Keir Starmer (ditto).

As for the rest, what is there to say? Some of us, it’s a select club with plenty of room to mingle, think Starmer had a rough deal from his party. Forcing him out was an act of cowardice, a panicky surrender to fragile Labour egos. But it happened, so meet the new boss. Burnham gave a good speech in Downing Street, coherent and passionate, and he makes all the right noises. Can he deliver? Too early to say, but here’s hoping.

Nigel Farage, by the way, says it was him who deposed Starmer. Yeah, whatever. Incidentally, Farage and his gang increasingly resemble children who knock on doors and run away. They shout abuse through letterboxes but scarper whenever anyone asks about that five million quid.

Meanwhile Farage hides in one of his many houses, possibly High Dudgeon Manor, on Quids In Avenue.

Never mind Nigel, it was the malign role of opinion polls that also did for Starmer. And Reform UK’s apparent ascendancy is itself based on endless polls, quite a few by entirely partial sources such as GB News. All those opinion snapshots allow  the BBC to explain their addiction to promoting Farage by saying that he is making the political weather.

Opinion polls are useful when an election is near. Other than that, they tell us little. If we followed all the polls there would be a general election every other month.

Farage bellows that we should be having one now. Yet our parliamentary system allows prime ministers to come and go mid-term. They hop off the train, or are more usually pushed off, and a shiny-faced new conductor jumps on board, and on we go.

It’s not perfect but mostly it works. When the Tories were changing leaders almost every other week, or so it seemed, you didn’t hear a peep from the editor of the Daily Mail about how there should be a general election. Funnily enough, he seems to have changed his mind now.

Incidentally again, this post on Threads from the satirically inclined Sir Michael Take, supposedly ‘the former Conservative MP for Dorset East’, is a neat response to the Mail’s front page below:

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 & could’ve been done yesterday. If he hasn’t solved the cost of living crisis by Friday then he must go!

Anyway, much of this has been said before, and said too often by me. As Burnham brings us all a bit of Manchester – no bad thing, but then I was raised near that place – let’s leave him to it for now. I wish him well in the knowledge that the only other likely options appear to be a Farage government (increasingly unlikely but possible), a Tory renaissance, or a hatchet-burying marriage of the two.

DID you read about Burnham in a newspaper, glance at the TV news or spot something bob past in the endless flow of social media?

I still buy one copy of the Guardian a week, on a Saturday, followed by The Observer on Sunday. Oh, and the occasional copy of the Yorkshire Post at the weekend.

It’s a dwindling habit, and newspaper readers are getting older. This is illustrated by my in-laws. Now approaching 90, they have two newspapers six days a week, a truly valiant effort.

According to an Ofcom survey of news consumption in 2025, newsprint is said now to account for only five per cent of the 61 minutes a day on average that people spend consuming news.

Two observations follow from that. One, if that’s the case why do broadcasters still show all that day’s front pages. Two, perhaps I should stop looking at the BBC papers review to see what rank slop the Mail or Telegraph are serving up for breakfast. Some habits need shaking.