‘Bizarre
choice’: business and Labour puzzle over Shabana Mahmood as future chancellor
The home
secretary, favourite to take over at No 11, has minimal economic credentials
and many MPs would prefer Ed Miliband
Jasper
Jolly, Richard Partington and Heather Stewart
Thu 16
Jul 2026 19.00 BST
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jul/16/shabana-mahmood-future-chancellor
Andy
Burnham last month promised the UK he would bring “good growth in every
postcode and hope in every heart” when he is installed as prime minister.
Britain’s industry leaders also have a hope in their hearts: that Burnham will
install a pro-business chancellor.
The
energy secretary, Ed Miliband, was for several weeks seen as the most likely
candidate to succeed Rachel Reeves but, after a brutal briefing battle and a
backlash from big business, the home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, appears to
have emerged as the frontrunner. Now businesses are scrambling to try to work
out how she might run the economy if confirmed in the Treasury on Monday.
The
emergence of Mahmood has reassured some bosses, several of whom privately said
they were concerned about Miliband’s reputation as being more left-leaning, as
well as his strong backing for Britain’s net zero ambitions. Miliband has held
firm on the UK’s decarbonisation targets as other countries have rowed back.
The
targets are seen by climate scientists and the government’s Climate Change
Committee as a crucial contribution to preventing damaging global heating but
Burnham has nevertheless come under pressure to ditch them by people who claim
they hinder job creation and threaten Britain’s struggling industrial base.
“I
suspect there is relief,” said a public affairs boss at a large British
manufacturer who is in the latter camp. “I can’t see how it would work” with
Miliband at the Treasury because of his “personal ambitions in terms of net
zero”, the boss said.
Yet few
business leaders have dealt with Mahmood directly because of her lack of
experience in any economic or business-facing departments. Mahmood is an
“unknown quantity” for businesses, said another insider at a FTSE 250 company.
One
exception to that is the security industry that runs much of the UK’s
immigration and justice system. One industry insider described her as a
“straight talker, reads her briefs and well respected by officials”. The sector
is hoping that her exposure to the realities of the UK’s security situation
might make her more likely than Reeves to increase funding.
A senior
lobbyist said that Mahmood “probably wouldn’t be the worst but I’d like someone
who’s more dynamic and more into business”, given the importance of the
chancellor in setting the conditions for UK firms. The Home Office has reported
no meetings between Mahmood and individual businesses during her tenure.
The
chancellor should not be chosen “just to give people jobs and move people
around” for Labour’s political management purposes, the lobbyist added.
Reeves
got into various scraps with business early in her two years as chancellor,
most notably over the heavily criticised decision to raise employers’ national
insurance contributions by £25bn. Business leaders – keen to avoid a repeat –
have expressed frustration over how to approach Burnham amid hurried
preparations for him to replace Starmer.
One
senior corporate affairs adviser to FTSE 100 companies said it remained
unclear, just days before Burnham’s installation in No 10, who would form the
core of Burnham’s backroom team beyond James Purnell, the former Labour cabinet
minister and ex-City adviser appointed as his chief of staff.
Those
seeking an introduction say there were effectively three separate teams
revolving around Burnham: his cadre of advisers as Greater Manchester mayor,
the campaign team for the Makerfield byelection, and a discreet group operating
behind the scenes planning for him to become prime minister. However, ahead of
his elevation to Downing Street the circle around him is shifting and
narrowing.
Several
advisers on economic policy from earlier in the process – including the former
local government minister Miatta Fahnbulleh – are not expected to remain part
of his team. Fahnbulleh could however remain in the frame for a ministerial
position. Richard Hughes, the former chair of the Office for Budget
Responsibility, is not expected to take a formal position. Jim O’Neill, the
former Goldman Sachs chief economist, and Andy Haldane, the former Bank of
England chief economist, are also unlikely to have formal roles.
Some
people believe the choice of candidate could still change. Figures close to
Miliband warned the elevation of Mahmood would be “disaster” for Burnham
because she lacked a serious background in economic policy and largely did not
share his political vision as an MP from the right of the party.
“[She]
would be a disastrous choice,” said one senior Labour figure who had been
pushing for Miliband to get the job. “No economic background or clear ideas on
how we turn the economy around. Stakes are too high. Big mistake if this is
where it’s headed.”
Others
suggested Mahmood’s appointment had not yet been “firmed up” and urged Burnham
to pick a figure such as Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, as a compromise
should he overlook Miliband for the role. Several economists and thinktankers
in Labour’s orbit also questioned whether Mahmood was aligned with Burnham’s
policy priorities.
“I would
understand Yvette or even Wes. But Shabana is a bizarre choice. She’s more
divisive than Ed, presents controversial policy as a fait accompli in contrast
to how Andy wants to work, is a natural centraliser, and has no economic
credentials or vision – risking Treasury capture and market credibility.”
Yet the
pound rallied on reports that Mahmood had beaten Milband to No 11, while
government borrowing costs dipped as markets assumed less radical policies or
less high levels of borrowing.
One
adviser on economic policy close to Burnham said Mahmood could have been picked
to send a signal to centrist Labour MPs and those from its “Blue Labour”
grouping, who are pushing for the party to appeal to traditional working-class
voters by taking a hardline stance on immigration while taking a leftwing
stance on industrial policy.
One
disappointed Burnham ally said: “It’s a litmus test: if you’re serious about
rolling back 40 years of neoliberalism and you want someone who’s
intellectually in tune with that and capable of doing it, Ed’s your candidate.”
They
speculated that the move was driven by fear of setting up an alternative power
base in No 11. “He’s not going to be a supplicant next door,” they said of the
current energy secretary.
.jpeg)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário