Find out here what AI analysis reveals about Andy Burnham’s delivery.
Conference season is underway, with party leaders setting out their plans against the prospect of an early General Election.
For Labour, the Liverpool conference marks a significant moment: Andy Burnham’s first as Prime Minister. It caps a remarkable turnaround since his leadership bid at last year’s conference.
The mood in the party has changed. Polling has improved, Burnham’s personal ratings are strong, and there is a growing belief that Labour can win the next election.
Policy has played a part. Burnham’s first weeks focused on the cost of living, with measures aimed at giving households more “breathing room”. But his advantage is also communicative.
His team understands how voters now consume politics: through short videos, social media clips and direct-to-camera content – not only lengthy broadcast interviews. Burnham is more visible, across more channels, and more accessible.
More importantly, he connects differently.
My colleagues and I used our AI to compare Keir Starmer’s first Downing Street speech with Burnham’s. You can see that here. The platform assesses factors including eye contact, pace, facial expression, body language, volume and tone.
The results reveal two very different styles.
Starmer was composed, serious and statesmanlike. Composure accounted for 67% of the emotional reading of his speech, followed by attention at 12% and interest at 9%. In the context of a landslide victory after years of political instability, that calmness made sense. You can see Starmer’s results here.
But his emotional register changed little. Whether discussing families, public services or national renewal, the delivery remained tightly controlled. His passion was present, but often beneath the surface.
Burnham’s speech was more dynamic. While composure still dominated, he scored significantly higher for attention and concern. Crucially, he took the audience on a journey: beginning sombrely, acknowledging political churn and public frustration, before ending with an appeal for “unity, common purpose and positivity”.
The change was visible as well as audible. When Burnham asked the public to “pull with me”, his smile gave the speech momentum and warmth. You can see Burnham’s results here.
Starmer delivered a message. Burnham told a story.
The contrast extended to body language. Starmer used the traditional Number 10 lectern, creating a controlled and formal presence. His body-language score was a strong 84/100: few distractions, deliberate gestures and a conventionally Prime Ministerial performance.
Burnham scored 90/100. Without the constraints of the lectern, his posture was more open and his gestures more expressive. His movement reinforced his message of “problem solving rather than point scoring”.
It is a subtle, but an important difference.
Starmer looked Prime Ministerial. Burnham looks Prime Ministerial too – but also more like someone speaking to the audience at home.
Communication cannot compensate for bad policy, weak delivery or a difficult economy. But it can build trust, create connection and buy political leaders time.
Voters do not experience government through policy papers or parliamentary debates. They experience it through a video on their phone, a breakfast TV interview, or a Prime Minister standing outside Number 10 explaining what happens next.
Only four points separated Starmer and Burnham overall. But the detail tells a more revealing story of two distinct ways of projecting authority, and why Burnham’s style is currently cutting through.
His conference speech in Liverpool will provide the next test.
TEAM LEWIS will analyse the conference speeches of Andy Burnham and Kemi Badenoch comparing emotional connection, audience engagement, body language and delivery.
Both will be carefully crafted, but the AI will reveal the detail behind the delivery.
Let us know if there’s any two politicians you would like to see analysed.
Speak to our public policy experts.
