By linking Brexit, voting reform and public services, the prime minister made a powerful, personal pitch for a brighter future

Andy Burnham’s first speech as prime minister to a Labour conference was a serious attempt to argue that rebuilding the public realm will be better for the country than shrinking the state. He is right about this. Mr Burnham’s belief in the power of government is welcome, as is his instinct that by spending now on public services he will save money later. Admitting that Brexit “has done more harm than good” before setting out options for a closer relationship with the EU could be the speech’s most consequential sentence. Offering voters a bargain at the next election – give up a little of the annual triple-lock increase in pensions for free personal care for older people – is a gamble.

But Mr Burnham clearly thinks that he will be able to show that enough has improved by then for him to ask voters to let him finish what he has started. The prime minister smartly recast “take back control” as a Labour argument. His pitch was that privatisation removed economic control, emasculating local government removed political control, and Brexit reduced control over immigration. This was deftly done – threading a common idea through housing, water, energy and Europe.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Bullying, manipulation and intimidation can destroy lives, yet abusive authoritarians continue to rise to the top. How do they get away with it – and can they be brought to heel?

When Andrea finally resigned, her colleagues told her the truth they had always known about her boss. Some apologised. Others admitted they had watched what happened to her and said nothing. One offered the sentence I have been unable to forget: “You’ve been an emotional stab vest for us. You protected us.”

Andrea was a senior legal executive with decades of credibility when she began reporting to a powerful new colleague. Within months, something was wrong. Expectations shifted without warning and feedback contradicted itself. He spoke over her in public and undermined her in private. Slowly she began questioning not just him but herself, her competence, even her grip on reality.

Unions, thinktanks and others say overhaul could provide investment Britain needs

Unions, thinktanks, environmental groups and charities have come together to call on ministers to boost the financial firepower of the national wealth fund to empower it to invest more in Britain and rebalance the country’s economy.

Lower energy bills, the revitalisation of the UK’s industrial heartlands and the provision of more high-quality jobs could all be unlocked by scaling up the NWF, according to a statement from organisations including the TUC, Greenpeace, WWF and the New Economics Foundation.

Turbocharging the retrofitting of homes and buildings.

Giving the public a bigger stake in critical infrastructure through taking part-ownership stakes in key projects.

Launching a targeted investment programme to bring new green industries to communities hit hardest by deindustrialisation.

Supporting a network of regional banks to funnel money into the small businesses that hold up local economies.

Trump administration undermining rule of law at home and worldwide, according to intergovernmental report

Key indicators of democracy in the US have fallen to their lowest levels in 50 years, with the global rule of law significantly undermined by the Trump administration’s “threats and actions”, data from a leading thinktank shows.

Around the world, judicial independence, credible elections and freedom of expression, press freedom and access to justice are all at their lowest levels for at least 30 years, according to the Stockholm-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International Idea).

A recent consultation on corporate reporting prizes the interests of shareholders over society. It’s a step in the wrong direction

The question of what corporations are for is deeply political. In a 1970 article for the New York Times, Milton Friedman argued that the “social responsibility of business is to increase its profits”. The idea that CEOs should worry about providing good jobs was “pure and unadulterated socialism”, he wrote. Friedman and his fellow neoliberals saw companies as vehicles for enforcing their politics. Their ideas endured: UK bosses are now paid 130 times more than average workers.

Despite Andy Burnham’s pledge to end neoliberalism, a 12-week consultation recently launched by his government risks entrenching it. The consultation was first announced as part of the Starmer government’s crusade against “red tape”. The average annual report for some businesses now runs to 98,000 words, and no doubt there are areas that could be simplified. But the consultation proposes removing vital information and presumes that company reports primarily serve shareholders, rather than other stakeholders. Both are steps in the wrong direction.