安迪·伯纳姆在2026年9月29日的利物浦工党大会上发表了演讲。
Andy Burnham gives his speech at the Labour party conference in Liverpool, 29 September 2026.
照片来源：Wiktor Szymanowicz/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock这位工党领袖以充满激情和雄心的方式阐述了自己的计划，但他的演讲内容中缺少了一个至关重要的部分——即关于如何应对全球性混乱问题的策略。伯纳姆之所以能在工党大会上发挥重要作用，不仅是因为会议在利物浦举行（他本人也来自默西塞德郡），更因为他完全熟悉工党的政治传统与文化背景。无论工党在哪里召开会议，他都是这个政党的核心成员；他对工党的情感表达方式了如指掌，同时也是该党文化传统的忠实传承者。
Photograph: Wiktor Szymanowicz/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock Rafael Behr The Labour leader has set out his plans with passion and ambition, but the story he tells lacks a vital chapter on managing global chaos ndy Burnham is at home at Labour conference and not only because it is in Liverpool and he has Merseyside roots. The prime minister is native to his political tribe wherever it gathers. He is fluent in its sentimental vocabulary and indigenous to its folk traditions. Keir Starmer had solid Labour bona fides. He joined the party as a teenager.
基尔·斯塔默虽然拥有扎实的工党背景（他十几岁时就加入了工党，父母还以基尔·哈迪的名字为他命名），但他缺乏将自身资历转化为与党员之间情感联系的能力。斯塔默常常提醒工党成员：在他接任领导职务时，该党曾一度处于“无法当选”的境地；正是他推行的改革让工党时隔一代人之后再次赢得了选举。不过，当一位领导人不断告诉党员们“他们的意识形态观念是通往成功的障碍”时，党员们的感激之情终究是有限的。
His parents named him after Keir Hardie. But he didn’t have Burnham’s knack for turning those red-team credentials into an emotional connection. Starmer liked to remind Labour that it had been unelectable when he took over and that the changes he enforced brought victory for the first time in a generation. It was true. But there’s a limit to the gratitude available to a leader who tells party members that their ideological instincts are the enemy of success.
托尼·布莱尔曾成功维持了这一“领导地位”长达十年，因为他始终能够赢得选举；但斯塔默几乎立刻就失去了这种支持——因为他根本不具备任何能够为政府制定明确方向的领导能力。
Tony Blair managed it for a decade because he kept winning. Starmer blew his credit almost immediately because he turned out not to have any instincts at all, or none that could set a coherent direction in government.
在大会筹备期间，许多部长们感到不安：他们的领导人会公开讨论各种可能成为或不会成为正式政策的议题（比如是否允许啤酒重新出现在足球场内，或者是否应该提供免费的国家医疗服务）。不过，最令人欣慰的是，现在有一位首相能够清晰地表达自己的优先事项，并擅长将这些优先事项传达给公众；他向人们描绘了英国可以成为的样子，以及为什么只有工党才能实现这一目标。
No one says that of Burnham. In the buildup to conference, ministers found it unnerving to have a leader who mused aloud on all kinds of things that might or might not be official policy, allowing beer back on to football terraces for example, or a national care service free at the point of use. But mostly it is refreshing to have a prime minister with clear priorities and a gift for narrating them, who tells a story about the country Britain could be and why only Labour could make it that way.
对于工党来说，这样的领导风格令人振奋——因为它让人们明白：他们无需偷偷摸摸地夺取权力；只要坚持正确的方向，胜利完全有可能在不违背任何意识形态原则的情况下实现。
It is energising for the party to be told they do not have to sneak up on power; that victory might be achieved without the submersion of ideological impulse.
在利物浦的演讲中，伯纳姆警告听众接下来会听到一些直言不讳、可能令人不适的观点。但他随后所说的大部分内容反而让支持者们感到如释重负。他的观点主张社会民主主义，认为英国在20世纪80年代走上了错误的道路；撒切尔主义的思想体系在社会上造成了分裂，并削弱了民众的经济地位。长期以来，该政党一直希望听到一位在任首相能够如此直言不讳地表达这些观点——并且这位首相还承诺要扭转私有化的进程。
In the preamble to his speech in Liverpool Burnham warned of discomforting candour to follow. Most of what he then said came as a blessed relief to the faithful. It was an argument for social democracy rooted in the view that Britain took a disastrous wrong turn in the 1980s; that the ideological impetus of Thatcherism was socially atomising and economically disempowering. The party has wanted to hear that judgment delivered by a serving prime minister, without caveat and with a commitment to throwing the gears of privatisation into reverse, for a long time.
他的论点强调的是集体繁荣，认为这种繁荣源于人们基于团结精神所做出的共同努力。根据该党的传统，他们并不建议以如此激进、具有争议性的政治纲领来参加选举。伯纳姆相信自己拥有独特的个人魅力，能够打破这种负面局面。
It was an argument for collective prosperity seeded by collective contributions made from a spirit of collective solidarity. Party lore counsels against fighting elections on such an unsqueamish left prospectus. Burnham is betting that he brings something special, a charismatic sway, that will break the curse.
与上周在纽约与唐纳德·特朗普进行电视会谈时的伯纳姆截然不同：那次会谈中，伯纳姆衣着随意、情绪激动，仿佛是在为自己的支持者加油鼓劲；而这次在利物浦的演讲中，他则显得紧张不安，面部表情严肃、全神贯注。与美国总统的首次双边会谈是一场充满挑战的“客场之战”——特朗普虽然可能表现得友好，但有时也会显得无礼且报复心强。
There was a marked difference between this Burnham, open-collared, emotional ardent, playing to his home crowd, and the one who looked nervous, face clenched with concentration, in a televised encounter with Donald Trump in New York last week. The first bilateral meeting with the US president was a tricky away game. Trump can be friendly but also ungracious and vindictive.
尽管如此，这位首相基本上没有受到太大影响。他确实因英国将查戈斯群岛移交给毛里求斯的计划而受到批评，但英美关系被评价为比斯塔默执政时期有所改善。特朗普表示，这位新首相“明白自己的职责”，并“知道该做什么”。
The prime minister came away largely unscathed. He had to endure a rebuke over British plans to transfer the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, but transatlantic relations were declared better than they had been under Starmer. Trump declared that the new guy “gets it” and “understands what he has to do”.
这个评价其实很模糊：它既可能意味着特朗普对伯纳姆政策理念的认可，也可能仅仅表示特朗普作为上司，确认了自己的命令已经得到执行。
That is an ambiguous formula. It could imply appreciation for Burnham’s own agenda. It could also be a boss’s recognition that tribute has been received from a subordinate, and orders given.
应对特朗普的复杂性，可能是伯恩ham在入主唐宁街10号之前尚未完全理解的工作内容之一。权力失衡从外部看显而易见，但它通过国家安全机制运作的方式——技术依赖的微观细节——则体现在军事和情报官员向新任首相提供的机密简报中。
The complexity of Trump-handling is an aspect of the job Burnham may not fully have grasped before entering No 10. The imbalance of power is obvious from the outside, but the way it operates through the machinery of national security – the finer points of technical dependency – are conveyed in classified briefings that an incoming prime minister gets from his military and intelligence officials.
这种认知为与无论谁坐在椭圆形办公室里的人保持亲密关系提供了令人信服的理由。当美国总统遵守条约并尊重民主盟友时，这是一项比较轻松的任务。而要去应对一个更喜欢腐败独裁者的总统，则需要耗费大量时间。
That knowledge makes a compelling case for cosiness with whoever sits in the Oval Office. It was an easier task when US presidents honoured treaties and respected democratic allies. It is time-consuming to navigate around one who prefers corrupt despots.
这就是为什么斯塔默在任内的许多精力都被外交事务所消耗，尽管他对国际旅行产生了一种依赖。峰会礼仪的镇痛剂抚慰了因国内挫败而受挫的自我。
That is one reason why so much of Starmer’s energy in office was consumed by foreign affairs, although he developed a dependency on international travel. The analgesic of summit protocol soothed an ego bruised by failure at home.
跳过一则又一则的时事通讯推广，伯恩罕决心不以同样的方式被分心。他乐见埃德·米利班德成为一个环球旅行的外交大臣，以便自己能做一个留守国内的首相。他的演讲中对世界其他地方只有寥寥数笔的提及：对乌克兰的友好致意，对俄罗斯和伊朗的严厉审视。绝口不提特朗普。
skip past newsletter promotion after newsletter promotion Burnham is determined not to get sidetracked in the same way. He is happy for Ed Miliband to be a globe-trotting foreign secretary so he can be a stay-at-home prime minister. There were only glancing references to the rest of the world in his speech: a friendly nod to Ukraine, a stern eye on Russia and Iran. No mention of Trump.
这种聚焦国内的做法是有其逻辑的。选民希望感受到政府正在全力解决他们眼前的问题，而这些问题往往不会用大国地缘政治的语言来表达。承诺的变革需要在人们的口袋里体现出来。这种改善必须在他们的商业街上清晰可见。伯恩罕承担不起失去这种关注的代价。
There is logic to this domestic focus. Voters want to feel that the government is applying itself to their immediate problems, which tend not to be expressed in geopolitical terms. The promised change needs to materialise in people’s pockets. The improvement has to be visible on their high streets. Burnham can’t afford to lose that focus.
问题在于：那些看似遥远的全球性问题往往会迅速转化为民众关心的、与日常生活息息相关的政治议题。中东的战争会导致油价飙升、供应链出现瓶颈，进而引发通货膨胀。英国选民可能并不关心谁控制着霍尔木兹海峡；他们更关心的是自己的工资被高昂的燃气费用吞噬，以及如果利率上升他们将无法负担房贷。他们可能不会关注美国10年期国债的收益率，也不理解那些维持人工智能产业繁荣的复杂债务循环机制。
The problem is that remote global issues have a way of showing up as bread-and-butter political grievances very quickly. A war in the Middle East causes a spike in oil prices and a bottleneck in supply chains, which feeds inflation. British voters might not care who controls the strait of Hormuz. They care that their wages are gobbled by gas bills and that they won’t be able to afford their mortgage if interest rates go up. They might not monitor the yield on 10-year US Treasury bills or understand the circular debt pump that keeps the AI boom aerated.
当这些全球性问题最终爆发时，他们能够感受到其冲击波——尤其是当这些冲击波影响到约翰·希利的预算案时。
They’ll hear the blast when the bubble bursts and feel bond-market shock waves if they rip through John Healey’s first budget.
全球相互依赖所带来的“传染效应”其实并不新鲜；但特朗普的出现为这种混乱局面带来了新的因素和更加严重的破坏性影响。英国在脱欧后处于一个战略上的“无人区”：它依赖欧洲单一市场进行贸易，同时又在安全问题上与美国国防部（五角大楼）紧密相连。英国试图夺回那些在布鲁塞尔谈判中为了所谓的“主权独立”而放弃的国际影响力。
The contagion mechanism of global interdependency is nothing new. But there is a new strain of chaos and a malign super-spreader in Trump. And Britain is uniquely vulnerable in the strategic no man’s land of Brexit, reliant on the European single market for trade, hardwired to the Pentagon for security, trying to claw back all the international influence that was surrendered in Brussels for the fiction of unencumbered sovereignty.
伯纳姆非常清楚这一点。他在演讲中表示，脱欧时所承诺的“重新掌控国家命运”实际上带来了相反的结果。他表示今年晚些时候会提出关于英欧关系长期发展的方案。这听起来可能并不引人注目，但考虑到他仍需完成那些旨在“重置”英欧关系的谈判（而这些谈判的议题其实相当有限），这样的目标已经相当雄心勃勃了。
Burnham understands this. He said in his speech that the Brexit promise to“take back control” had delivered the opposite. He said he would set out options for the long-term future of EU-UK relations later in the year. That may not sound dramatic, but is ambitious enough given that he still has to complete negotiations on the fairly modest deal to “reset” relations that he inherited from Starmer.
值得注意的是，当讨论的议题涉及海外事务时，伯纳姆的雄心与愿景的清晰度便会变得模糊不清。这位首相确实有一个大胆的计划，但该计划依赖于全球范围内的混乱局势，才能为英国争取到一些喘息的空间。在阐述自己的观点时，他表现得充满激情且极具说服力；然而，他的这种表现更像是一个在“主场”（即国内政治舞台上）游刃有余的“选手”。而他面临的一些最严峻的挑战，恰恰来自于国际事务。
It is revealing that the clarity of Burnham’s ambition, the lucid lines of his vision, get blurred when the subject ranges overseas. The prime minister has a bold plan, but one that relies on global forces of chaos affording Britain some breathing space. He was passionate and compelling when making his arguments, but it was the performance of a player who is comfortable on home ground, in the national league. Some of the toughest challenges he faces are international fixtures.
拉斐尔·贝尔（Rafael Behr）是《卫报》的专栏作家。您对这篇文章中提出的问题有什么看法吗？如果您愿意通过电子邮件提交一篇不超过300字的回复，并希望我们的编辑将其刊登在“读者来信”栏目中，请点击这里。
Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist 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