The lessons Andy Burnham must learn from Nicola Sturgeon's fatal mistakes

No, not Andy Burnham, until last week the popular Mayor of Manchester. This was the reception for former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon in 2014, when appointed uncontested to Scotland’s top political job.

Both her leadership style and divisive policies would eventually undo her, in ways unforeseeable by once adoring crowds. But, likely future Prime Minister Burnham should learn lessons from both, despite Sturgeon still – lamentably - failing to.

Contrast the confident, stadium-performing Sturgeon of 2014, with the scandal-burdened defensiveness we see today. Angrily swatting away hard questions with cries of ‘misogyny’ on various book festival stages, this clearly isn’t someone comfortable – or ready – to honestly reflect on her legacy.

No political movement, save for a totalitarian one, benefits from unquestioning loyalty to a leader. If you commit the cardinal sin Sturgeon did of believing your own hype, the certain downfall will be all the more spectacular.

On his return to Westminster last week, Andy Burnham – the Northern lad everyone can imagine having a pint with – posed for selfies with a huge crowd of adoring Labour colleagues. A twanging ‘uh-oh’ of recognition from many. My southern friends, we in Scotland have been here already. It may seem churlish to criticise a happy man’s collegiate support. But several MPs beaming about Burnham’s return push gender policies of the kind that scuppered Sturgeon’s credibility. As that unfolded, many of us – mostly women - lost our sense of living in a sane world.

Burnham has a reputation for flip-flopping politically. On the gender issue, he’s been no different. But once – as is predicted – he’s behind the door of No. 10, he’ll need to get his lines written swiftly.

It’s a gigantic task he has set himself. His ‘very naughty boy’ route back to Westminster, with the intention to replace Keir Starmer as PM, was bold. That boldness must be matched with sense. No issue is more certain to scupper him with the public - as it did Sturgeon - than ignoring the everlasting threat to women and children from gender-identity policies.

Fighting against such things often feels like a sadistic game of whack-a-mole. One day, you’re celebrating male murderers finally being removed from women’s prisons in Scotland after 20 years of weapons-grade lunacy.

The next, you’re watching MPs vote down a motion to halt the puberty-blocking Pathways Trial, as happened the day after Burnham’s return to the Commons. Researchers soon plan to give minors as young as 11 a cocktail of hormone-suppressing drugs to see if it harms them or not. Which, of course it will, as puberty is a vital stage of human development.

Only three Labour MPs – Jonathan Hinder, Mary Glinden, and Jonathan Brash – supported the Tory-led motion to stop this appalling experiment. Many others, like Burnham, abstained.

Political expediency? Deciding how to play this? A calculated move from someone known for pragmatism? The question remains: will the three rebels be listened to, or face the fate of now-independent MP Rosie Duffield?

For entering the fray some years ago, Duffield - then Labour MP for Canterbury - faced near- total ostracism in the party. Even while threats of death-by-jackhammer raged against her from lunatic trans-activists, there wasn’t a peep of support from Starmer.

Like Sturgeon towards then SNP MP Joanna Cherry over the same issue, he didn’t register the inherent disgrace of ignoring threats of political violence against colleagues.

Meanwhile, some whispered private support to Duffield, while publicly pretending not to share her views. That’s bad enough behaviour from the likes of poets and artists; it’s despicably poor – unforgiveable, really - from highly-paid legislators.

Will Burnham do the right thing on this issue? Much as some would like there to be, there’s no plain sailing way through. If political credibility is paramount however, no sensible leader can endlessly flip-flop. Just ask the soon-to-be former ‘perhaps 1 per cent of women have penises’ PM Keir Starmer.

I understand the aversion to this issue: it can mangle one’s calm like nothing else. But ignorance isn’t optionable for those with political power. Understanding precisely why the game of whack-a-mole continues is crucial.

Gender-identity lobbyists have a three-pronged agenda: destabilise the meaning of ‘woman’ and ‘man’ in life and law; normalise ‘trans kids’ and childhood transition to legitimise adult trans identities; usher in ‘trans-inclusive’ ‘conversion therapy’ bans to make questioning the ideology criminal, piggy-backing off the already outlawed horrors of gay and lesbian conversion practices.

It sounds wild, because it is. It’s happened worldwide. In the UK, the first goal is thankfully legally defeated, the second discredited but – extraordinarily - not universally condemned.

The third pincer-move of this globally powerful movement continues. Coinciding with Burnham’s return, a draft conversion therapy ban bill was laid before parliament by Labour’s minister for equality, Olivia Bailey, last week.

Some speculate that’s been done to force his hand; many preening selfie-queens in his welcome party support it.

As a down-to-earth chap battling Reform’s insurgency, it’s doubtful Burnham wants the ‘gender wars’ to squander his mission. But not grappling with this insidious movement is unwise politically. That Sturgeon’s reign saw male murderers housed with female prisoners is a horrific stain on her legacy.

Joseph Chamberlain famously said all political careers end in failure. But you can fail like a Nicola Sturgeon, or like a Tony Blair, or Gordon Brown.

What the UK needs – urgently – is strong, sane political leadership, an end to socially- corrosive identity-politics, and a government skilful enough to navigate myriad dangers from current global conflict.

A lot to ask. But, it isn’t 2014 anymore. Selfies and banter won’t cut it – no matter how well Andy Burnham passes the pub test.