𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

At 7am, I was outside Andy Burnham’s home in the damp half-light of a Manchester morning. Was this really the only way to get answers from the man seeking the keys to No 10?

Soon he emerged, resplendent in a yellow running top, for his morning run. I seized my moment and asked him about his ever-evolving position on Brexit.

“Has your position changed, Mr Burnham? Are we in or are we out? Which move of the Hokey Pokey are you performing today?”

He wagged his finger, shook his head and reprimanded me, before loping on down the lane. Sadly, this was not the first time I have faced rejection at the hands of the Mayor.

His office ignored my emails when he announced his candidacy, and then declined my request for a proper chat about British sovereignty.

The question our wannabe prime minister is so keen to ignore is relatively straightforward.

At the Labour Party conference last October, he said he wanted to see Britain rejoin the EU “in his lifetime”.

This week, with a by-election looming, he has changed his mind. The people of Makerfield, where he is standing, voted 65% to leave. The timing of his conversion is rather convenient.

You might sympathise with a politician confronted by a reporter at an inconvenient hour.

But Mr Burnham shouldn’t be shocked to find out the country is quite interested in what he believes.

He’s seeking election in a constituency where the majority of voters hold strong views on the very question he now wishes to skirt.

If he cannot explain his change of heart to a journalist, how does he propose to explain it to his electors?

This is not only about Brexit, though that matter is serious enough.

It’s about a deeper problem rapidly entrenching itself into our country’s politics: the putrid belief among politicians that they can manage their way through difficult questions by avoiding them altogether.

We are not fools. We can see the calculation Mr Burnham has made.

A man who wanted to rejoin the EU last October but opposes it this May, just as he seeks to represent a constituency that voted overwhelmingly to leave, is making a transparent attempt to be all things to all people.

There is nothing wrong with changing one’s mind, but at least explain why. If Mr Burnham believes his new position is correct, he should defend it openly.

If he believes his old position was mistaken, he should say so. He shouldn’t jog away from the question.

Democracy requires accountability, and that requires politicians to answer questions they find uncomfortable. Mr Burnham may avoid difficult conversations now, but he will find they follow him to Westminster.

He can jog, but he cannot hide forever.