Barring some sort of disaster on Labour’s part, it’ll be Bev Craig. By all accounts she’s able.
Bev is cool, be good if she stands for Mayor. Hopefully if Andy B supports her and they run a decent campaign...
How is Bev Craig viewed in the rest of Greater Manchester - is there any sort of resentment against Manchester as a city in rest of GM - Bolton, Wigan, Rochdale etc?
There was previous talk about Gary Neville 🙂
Gary Neville was, for so many reasons, a terrible idea and I’m glad that got shot down early.
Craig is by all accounts good. You don’t rise to be leader of MCC without being a sharp operator.
What will be interesting is to see if she does anything about the stalled Bee (Active) Network which hasn’t really recovered from Chris Boardman going to ATE and where the city region has delivered <10% of the ten-year network plan in eight years…
one of Burnhams biggest tasks is going to be taking on the musk/farage/lowe inspired riots that i fear we are in for during a long hot summer
https://bsky.app/profile/rolandmcs.bsky.social/post/3moqvynoe3223
Meet the new boss... Slightly more charismatic, yet still totally beholden to exactly the same underhand right wing powers that be, and almost completely indistinguishable as the old boss...
Forget the fact that Andy Burnham has been a good, if not great, Mayor of Manchester... As PM, he'll be in exactly the same shit position that Starmer is in where by virtue of selling his soul out for votes to the highest bidders (the right wing press, the Israeli govt etc etc.) nobody will get to see the Burnham that they voted for... Because of the way that UK politics is uniquely funded by the mega rich, the press, and influential outside sources, all we'll get will be exactly what we've got with Starmer, but with less grey hair and a little more wit...
Funding is a problem. When it comes to our media and social media space as much as for political parties. But what’s really the big problem is how people vote. The voters support for Reform (that was there as UKIP for Cameron and has pushed all PMs since towards more right wing populist attempts to woo them since) is twisting our governments. Any PM seeking to neutralise the threat from UKIP/Brexit/Reform (or whatever it is called next) becomes disliked by most Brits… both those they are trying to win over (because its never enough) and everyone else.
Despite much good that Burnham has said previously about our mixed communities and our neighbours (both locally and internationally) I suspect he’ll be pushed down the route of promising to keep people out and reducing the number of non-white faces at the checkout or treating your health problems.
And then there’s the money. We chose to restrict our growth by erecting trade barriers with our neighbours. That needs fixing, or people need to be told the truth, directly, about what limits our growth. No PM is going to do that. Because… the voters.
Labour needs to be realistic and change its message from “growth” to “redistribution”… but again, talk to the public and many think that benefits are the problem… not inequality. Even where they are suffering because of inequality. Be it their region or their household.
We chose to restrict our growth by erecting trade barriers with our neighbours. That needs fixing, or people need to be told the truth, directly, about what limits our growth. No PM is going to do that. Because… the voters.
Significant majority in favour of rejoin. Reform / tory core votors will not vote labour anyway.
Rejoin would-be a vote gaining pledge
WFA Being means tested absolutely made sense but it was poorly executed and terribly communicated, likewise benefit cuts etc
not teally. Saves very little money and means some folk who need it miss out.
Couldn't it be handled the same way as the Scottish Pension Age Winter Heating Payment? Give it to all that might qualify and then recoup it in taxation from those earning above the cut-off.
yup. thats thd right way to do it
We chose to restrict our growth by erecting trade barriers with our neighbours. That needs fixing, or people need to be told the truth, directly, about what limits our growth. No PM is going to do that. Because… the voters.
Significant majority in favour of rejoin. Reform / tory core votors will not vote labour anyway.
Rejoin would-be a vote gaining pledge
They might be until they're told what it'll cost. We'll not be rejoining with all our opt outs and rebates. All part of the continuing stupidity of leaving in the first place.
They might be until they're told what it'll cost. We'll not be rejoining with all our opt outs and rebates.
How much would it cost NOT to rejoin?
It's already costing £100bn per year and that's over the last 10 years since the referendum. That's most of the cost of HS2 in one year, it's 4-6 months running the entire NHS.
It would take another decade to reset the relationship, it probably wouldn't be as good as it was before but can the country afford to keep doing without that kind of cash?
They might be until they're told what it'll cost. We'll not be rejoining with all our opt outs and rebates.
How much would it cost NOT to rejoin?
It's already costing £100bn per year and that's over the last 10 years since the referendum. That's most of the cost of HS2 in one year, it's 4-6 months running the entire NHS.
It would take another decade to reset the relationship, it probably wouldn't be as good as it was before but can the country afford to keep doing without that kind of cash?
They're meaningless numbers to most voters. What will mater is joining the Euro and the Schengen area.
What will mater is joining the Euro and the Schengen area.
Perhaps - but I think a chunk of people who have discovered the downside of losing free movement might think Shengen isn’t a crazy plan and let’s face it - it solves the small boats issue! Of course it doesn’t solve immigration but perhaps a UK actually willing to embrace Europe might find a continent wide solution rather than focussing on solving it by being isolationist.
the average voter may have some vague attachment to the pound with a queens head on it - but as we increasingly go digital payment and the royal family become irrelevant the arguments against the Euro are about economics far beyond the comprehension of the ordinary voter! Just tell them you’ll have 1.2x as many Euro as pounds and you’ll probably get enough votes from people who believed Brexit would increase NHS spending!
Because of the way that UK politics is uniquely funded by the mega rich, the press, and influential outside sources, all we'll get will be exactly what we've got with Starmer, but with less grey hair and a little more wit...
So we may as well give up on democracy, or voting?
They're meaningless numbers to most voters. What will mater is joining the Euro and the Schengen area.
There are ways round both. Cyprus hasn’t joined Schengen and I think Sweden was obliged to join the Euro but has never got round to passing the relevant legislation.
What will mater is joining the Euro and the Schengen area.
That gets all the votes from my household. It's only 3 in a very blue constituency, but it's 3 more than any party not offering to rejoin will get in the future.
I think Sweden was obliged to join the Euro but has never got round to passing the relevant legislation.
I _think_ that there was a referendum here and people decided that we wanted to retain the krona. Denmark and Norway also use their own Kronor (with the Danish one being uncomfortably higher value than tthe Swedish one).
Active travel has only improved in certain parts of Manchester (Salford and Chorlton areas) - if you are East and South, it's still shoot. He'll do a better job than Starmer and hopefully keep Reform out.
So we may as well give up on democracy, or voting?
This is the position of those who think government policy should be dictated by the bond market.
All busy outside No 10 this morning.
I'd like for the UK to rejoin the EU, but I can understand the reluctance of most politicians to push for it now. It'd require either a referendum or a general election fought primarily on the issue, then at least a parliamentary term's worth of time to do all the negotiations, get everything back into alignment and agreed. And beyond all the technical negotiations, the agonising over things like Schengen and the Euro, the EU is going to have to be persuaded that we are committed long-term and won't just tear it all up again following the next general election.
Not only will the whole process take up much of the government's bandwidth for a very long time they would have to be confident that they can keep the public on-board with the plan for that whole period, even when it's taking time and attention away from all the other things demanding the government's attention, even during the constant howls of betrayal coming from Reform and their cheerleaders in the media and even once the incredibly (suspiciously, even) well funded "save our sovereignty", "save our pound" and "save our borders" campaigns get going.
I.just don't think Burnham appeals to the whole country.
No, but he appeals to the North and hence the Red Wall a lot more because a) he is Northern and b) because he has had success in Manchester so has support.
I'd like for the UK to rejoin the EU
Until it's the settled policy of all political parties, it's a non starter. I din't think we'll be back in, in my lifetime.
Streeting has fallen in behind Burnham. Clear that Burnham standing means Rayner won't. I think that's it pretty much done. Labour MPs will back Burnham and the membership will nod him through.
Until it's the settled policy of all political parties, it's a non starter. I din't think we'll be back in, in my lifetime.
Why?
You'll never have all parties agree to rejoining the EU, given at least two were born from movements specifically aimed at leaving the EU.
If a party campaigns on either rejoining or having a second referendum and then wins a majority they would have a mandate to do just that.
Well that seems all very well manged & organised.
I suppose it means he doesn't have to promise anything specific to get elected leader.
Not sure what that means for changes to government policy.
You'll never have all parties agree to rejoining the EU
Pretty much. Unless and until every party that has a chance of gaining a majority at a GE has it as a nailed on certainty, apart from a rump of MPs and a teeny minority of the public we're out, and that's it.
I can see us becoming something like an associate member for trade or something like that, but that'll still mean we'll be a rules taker, and that's a red-line for lots of folks. Also, the EU has just seen one of it's largest economies leave because it didn't want broader political integration, and it's answer to that has been to make that easier to integrate, (aggressively reforming to QMV instead of previous unanimity rules) that doesn't sound like an organisation that's keen to have the UK back.
Well that seems all very well manged & organised.
Yep, and presumably it's about time to start inssesintly saying Burnham is useless and needs to quit?
Has to be a leadership election or the extreme right will jump on this and cite that Burnham lacks a mandate. Let Victoria Derbyshire loose on him again to scrutinise his economic and social vision.
I _think_ that there was a referendum here and people decided that we wanted to retain the krona. Denmark and Norway also use their own Kronor (with the Danish one being uncomfortably higher value than tthe Swedish one).
Eh, Norway isn't in the EU!
I can see us becoming something like an associate member for trade or something like that, but that'll still mean we'll be a rules taker, and that's a red-line for lots of folks. Also, the EU has just seen one of it's largest economies leave because it didn't want broader political integration, and it's answer to that has been to make that easier to integrate, (aggressively reforming to QMV instead of previous unanimity rules) that doesn't sound like an organisation that's keen to have the UK back.
No need for a special associate membership - you just join the EEA but not the EU. This is logically what we should have done when leaving but the PM at the time helpfully decided "Brexit means Brexit" when the referendum question only asked one simple question which was about the EU! In reality we are a rules taker even now - we still have virtually every EU rule and we still align with most new EU rules!
I.just don't think Burnham appeals to the whole country.
Can you suggest a candidate from any political party who appeals to the whole of their own membership never mind the whole country?
I think your point that he "seems a bit northern" is actually a big bit of his appeal, even if you are Scottish, Welsh or from the West Country - he's not inherently a Westminster/Whitehall/London Elite... In fact even in the less affluent bits of the SE I suspect he'll have some appeal because he's not another privately educated guy who is out of touch with how hard things can be.
But lets be clear, the other main candidate for PM at the next GE is Farage, so I don't think appealing to the whole country is a prerequisite to being PM.
@poly Yes, I know that, but Sweden (where I live) is and we retain the krona, as does Denmark (also EU) and Norway (EEA).
Can't help thinking that the right-wing press have shot themselves in the foot though. I'd have though if you've as deeply unpopular PM as Starmer in place, the very last thing you'd want is arguably a more popular more left wing one to come along and replace him?
Can't help but think the 'get rid of Starmer' campaign has been just a tad too effective
Andy Burnham's probably smart enough to realise that he needs to talk about the cause of wealth inequality and the media BS that drive dissatisfaction before mentioning brexit. Rejoining the EU may help resolve some of those causes but it's a topic that will drown out anything else at this stage. He or any other leader needs to tell the right stories first (backed in sense and policy o/c, but lead with the stories that support them).
Will he do that or is he a red Tory? Maybe we'll find out. At least Starmer has stepped aside rather than doing a Biden and helping Farage get in.
Despite much good that Burnham has said previously about our mixed communities and our neighbours (both locally and internationally) I suspect he’ll be pushed down the route of promising to keep people out and reducing the number of non-white faces at the checkout or treating your health problems.
If he does that we will get Farage. It's where Starmer was a failure, he was smart and a decent guy but weak as a leader and communicator. We need is a leader who can talk to people on the level of the majority of the country who have friends, marriages, colleagues, streets, neighbours and communities across races and cultures, as well as addressing the concerns that many have, the causes and what they are doing about it (or what is realistic vs fairy tales from Reform). The UK is not in trouble because of immigration in itself. Someone has to break the distraction technique cycle as well as talk straight on where things are and how it can improve.
Along that line is the brexit Q, but there's bigger points or principles to come first imo.
Any PM seeking to neutralise the threat from UKIP/Brexit/Reform (or whatever it is called next) becomes disliked by most Brits…
Perhaps they shouldn't aim to neutralise them by absorbing some of it, they should lead in a way that makes that side of politics less relevant. They're a protest vote so reduce the issues the protests are about - it's about poverty, inequality and lack of opportunity more than immigration. A PM reacting by aligning with them is playing their game, or worse, in a game they don't realise thy're playing.
Andy Burnham has a decision to make. He's as popular now as he is ever likely to be. Does he go for a General Election in the autumn and give himself a chance of a full term? Or does he wait and hope that things are better in a couple of years?
For myself I think he won't call an election.
Im rather hoping there is a contest for the job. I want there to be one to force the runners and riders to have to get out in public and actually state what there plan is for the next 3 years and how they will do it. A coronation doesn't give any clue as to what is on offer which I think is bad news for the country and makes it so easy for the hostile press to go on the offensive.
I can see some merits in the winner calling an election. The Tories are in a mess, so it's likely to be a fight against reform. The advantages of having that fight now is timing. Where will Reform get enough candidates to stand in all the seats from. Last weeks by election showed that the talent pool wasn't very deep. Also I think they are vulnerable to being asked who will form even a basic cabinet. They simply don't have enough MPs even including the Tory ones to form a cabinet. Who would take on the big secretaries of state, Fred the plumber from Sunderland that isn't even a candidate yet?
I don't GAS where he's from. I don't think many do. Does he have values, does he say what needs to be said and have a plan?
Farage is a public school commodities trader backed by wealthy business interests but 'the hard-working average man in the street' hears what he says and thinks he's one of them.
Don't really GAS what party he's from either. Labour aren't socialists. Rory Stewart has all the trappings of a Tory boy yet he may have been a very good PM and party leader, he's got the right values.
Party politics is dead imo. It means almost nothing anymore. Now it's just who leads with what, and what's behind them.
Hilarious listen to the Tories saying everything to avoid saying Burnham should go for a snap election.
Any election would be catastrophic for Tories at the moment - squeezed out of everywhere by first past the post.
For those of us who don't live in some northern town, Manchester, Brum? Burnham is currently irrelevant. He may become less so in due course sadly.
Looking from this side of the channel it seems odd that a newly elected MP who isn't even a minister gets named PM without some kind of electoral race.
On Burnham himself I'd like to know abit more about about him than "privatisation" which I'm happy with but there are far bigger issues: Ukraine - I can find nothing from him. Climatic crisis - something to do with buses but I'd like to see more stop oil. The digital economy - he seems more intersted in buses, trains and apprenticeships, does he know this is 2026?
For those of us who don't live in some northern town, Manchester, Brum? Burnham is currently irrelevant. He may become less so in due course sadly.
Why sadly? Because he's Northern?
Well thats my political predictions running true to form. I really didn't think Starmer would go 🙂
So in going for a complete set of failed predictions does this mean Burnham will turn out to be anything radical? I'm saying no significant change in direction 🙂
Ukraine - I can find nothing from him. Climatic crisis - something to do with buses but I'd like to see more stop oil. The digital economy - he seems more intersted in buses, trains and apprenticeships, does he know this is 2026?
In 2026 a lot of people can't afford to keep running a car to get to work and the busses are not much use to anyone. Trains are stupid money. Apprenticeships are a good thing, gives options to those who don't want 50k of student debt or soulless office work. Maybe it would be good to have someone focussed on things that matter to pissed-off voters, things that could make a difference and that aren't the 'stop the boats' distractions. Big headline policy matters but so do the details.
