For Burnham’s Britain to Become a Force for Good, National Renewal and Global Leadership Must Go Hand in Hand 

As Andy Burnham seeks to position himself as a different kind of political leader, many are asking what a Burnham-style vision for Britain might look like in practice. Any ambition to make Britain a force for good must confront a set of difficult realities. Internationally, the United Kingdom’s retreat from its development commitments has raised concerns about its ability to act as a credible global partner. Domestically, shrinking opportunities for civic engagement and the persistence of anti-Muslim hatred continue to challenge the health of our democracy. For Britain to become a genuine force for good, international responsibility and domestic renewal must be pursued together. 

Nowhere is this challenge more visible than in the debate surrounding overseas development assistance (ODA). As Muslim Charities Forum highlighted in its analysis of the UK’s aid reductions, development spending plays a critical role in supporting poverty reduction and humanitarian response efforts across the globe. At a time when climate change and conflict continue to affect millions of people worldwide, retreating from international development risks undermining decades of progress while weakening Britain’s position as a trusted partner. Development assistance also serves as a first line of defence against instability and insecurity, helping to address the underlying drivers of conflict and suffering. 

At the same time, the sector must acknowledge that public attitudes towards development spending are closely linked to political rhetoric and public trust in institutions. Rebuilding support for ODA will require strong political leadership and a clearer public case for aid as an investment in global stability, poverty reduction and shared prosperity. A future government serious about restoring Britain’s global standing should therefore commit to a pathway back to the 0.7 per cent aid target, underpinned by evidence and shared responsibility. 

There also needs to be a corresponding strengthening of civil society. This means creating the conditions for communities to participate meaningfully in public life and contribute to the decisions that affect them. Civil society organisations play a vital role in enabling that participation. They are often the bridge between institutions and communities that feel overlooked or excluded from political debate. When civil society is strong, democratic engagement is strengthened. 

This reality makes the the Civil Society Covenant particularly significant. Introduced with the ambition of resetting the relationship between government and civil society, the covenant represented an acknowledgement that meaningful partnership is essential to effective policymaking. However, as we move one year on from its introduction, the key question is whether those ambitions are translating into genuine change. The success of the covenant cannot be measured by statements of intent alone. It will depend on whether organisations feel genuinely empowered to influence policy, advocate for their communities and help shape national conversations. Crucially, this must be a journey that includes the whole sector, ensuring that organisations of all sizes and backgrounds can contribute to and benefit from its ambitions. 

This is especially important in light of growing concerns about anti-Muslim hatred and the impact it continues to have on communities across the country. Recent threats of far-right terrorism, including incidents in Suffolk, have served as a stark reminder of the dangers posed by extremist ideologies and the devastating consequences they can have for individuals and communities. These incidents do not exist in isolation; they sit within a broader social and political environment in which hostility towards Muslims has too often been normalised. Anti-Muslim hatred continues to pose a significant challenge to social cohesion, civic participation and equality of opportunity. 

Beyond the immediate harm, hostility towards Muslims erodes trust and undermines the principle that everyone should be able to participate safely and equally in society. While the introduction of an anti-Muslim hostility definition is a welcome and significant step forward, it should be viewed as the beginning rather than the end of the process. The real test will be how effectively the definition is implemented across public life. A definition alone will not address the prejudice, discrimination and hostility experienced by many Muslims unless it is consistently understood, adopted and applied. It must be backed by tangible action, including investment in the physical security of mosques, Islamic centres, schools and other community institutions, with support proportionate to the size, geographic spread and needs of Britain’s Muslim population. 

Ultimately, Britain’s ability to exercise positive leadership will depend on whether it can rebuild confidence and trust both internationally and at home. This requires a willingness to invest in global solidarity while standing firmly against the forces that seek to divide communities. By renewing its commitment to international development, creating genuine partnerships with civil society, and addressing the realities of far-right extremism and anti-Muslim hatred, Britain can strengthen the foundations necessary for both national renewal and global leadership. 

MCF urges a future Burnham government to renew Britain’s commitment to international development, create the conditions for civil society to flourish, and take decisive action to tackle the growing threats of far-right extremism and anti-Muslim hatred. These are essential steps towards rebuilding trust at home and strengthening Britain’s position as a force for good abroad.