Forum Topic

Andy Burnham might throw his hat in the ring.

Well, that says it all really.G’wan Andy,  Kier is a stiff, the sooner he’s gone the better!

Gerry Boyce ● 36d32 Comments

"..What shall we do? Apart from die?"When it comes to death Labour are not short of policies!

Ed Robinson ● 33d

"The annual cost of UK welfare benefits for the year 2024/25 was forecast to be around £313 billion, with the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) projecting this figure to increase to approximately £373.4 billion by 2029/30. The largest portion of this expenditure is allocated to pensioners, accounting for nearly half of the total budget, which covers the State Pension, Pension Credit, Winter Fuel Payments, and pensioner housing benefits. Welfare Spending TrendsOverall Expenditure: The UK's welfare spend is significant, forecast at £313.0 billion for 2024/25, representing 10.9% of GDP, according to the OBR. Future Projections: Spending is expected to rise substantially to £373.4 billion by 2029/30. Key Drivers of Spending:Pensioner Spending: This accounts for the biggest share, projected to reach £181.8 billion by 2029/30. Working-Age Benefits: The rollout of Universal Credit and rising costs of health and disability-related benefits contribute significantly to the overall welfare bill. Breakdown of the Welfare Budget (2024/25 figures)Pensioners: Approximately £150.7 billion was spent on benefits for pensioners.Working-Age Individuals: Just over £123 billion was spent on benefits for people of working age. Disabled People and Health Conditions: Around £70 billion was allocated to support for disabled people and those with health conditions." (AI) Looks like the pensioners are the main problem. What shall we do? Apart from die?And Working-Age Benefits, what about them? We can't expect the poor employers to pay more, can we?

David Ainsworth ● 34d

I was referring more to the investment into the post carbon economy that a lot of people were very disappointed that Reeves and Starmer abandoned.I’m not sure that renationalising utilities like water, for example, is quite as clear cut and uncontested as you suggest; it’s a live and important debate about how best to sort out the current shambles.I suppose what I’m saying is that there are serious systemic issues here that need to be dealt with in order to get growth and resolve the problems re inequality of wealth and opportunity. I’m not sure any party is really up to the task, but the first step, in my opinion, is acknowledging that we are in deep trouble.

Gerry Boyce ● 34d

There is indeed an appetite for a more left wing approach among the grassroots of the party, represented by Andy Burnham’s ‘Mainstream’ movement, who advocate policies such as nationalisation of the utilities, wealth taxes and opposition to welfare cuts. These policies, once advocated by Keir Starmer when he was campaigning for leadership of the party,  as Burnham is campaigning now, were ditched by Labour for good reason: they would bring economic disaster to the country.  Nationalisation of water would cost £100 billion and the cost of nationalising gas and electricity would be £185 billion. The imposition of wealth taxes would not only be unfair on asset rich but income poor people - it would also encourage wealth producers to leave the country.  The annual cost of welfare benefits is currently around £300 billion, representing around a quarter of government expenditure, an unsustainable drain on the economy. If Burnham were ever to win the leadership and become Prime Minister, I suspect that he would ditch these policies just as Starmer has. In this case, no doubt, a new protest movement would spring up among the grassroots unwilling to relinquish their  brand of utopian socialism,  campaigning to replace Burnham with another populist.

Steven Rose ● 34d

"grassroots"So the members were happy with the appointment of Mandleson and not the sacking?Trying to get a sense of why exactly their will be fireworks!

Ed Robinson ● 34d

I wouldn’t downplay the mess the Tories left behind, but Labour have not been up to the task of sorting it out either. Their strategy of blaming the Tories has worn thin and lacks much credibility now.You say there is an ideological void at the heart of the party, which I am not sure of. I think within the grassroots of the party there is much more of an appetite for a more radical and left wing approach; I don’t think the government really reflects this. My sense is that there will be fireworks at the Labour conference this year; an awful lot of furious members will want to let the leadership know their feelings. I don’t think the latest shenanigans with Mandelson will help one iota.

Gerry Boyce ● 34d

It is no surprise, Ed, that despite years in opposition which might have used to devise sensible policies, Labour came to power with no clue of how to run the country. That is because of the ideological void at the heart of the party.  Apart from a minority on the left, Labour MPs no longer believe in the ideal of nationalisation on which their party was founded. The socialism of the past has been replaced by a half-hearted commitment to a market economy. Unfortunately their plan for economic growth is undermined by the high taxation which they need to satisfy their client voters, workers in the public sector and the increasing number of people on benefits. Labour ministers continually  blame their maladministration on the 'mess left behind by the Tories', an excuse which is now wearing thin with public. And their supporters outside Parliament compensate for the poor record of the party they voted for with denunciations of hate figures on the right, whether Trump, Johnson or Farage.

Steven Rose ● 35d

All well documented David well before the election.In the last two years before the election the Labour party got nearly £1m of tax payers money specifically for policy, as did the Conservatives and Liberals. Of course there is other money paid to the opposition parties too.That's a shocking amount of public money given the quality of their manifestos.Yet some people call for more tax payers money to fund these parties/faiths/cults/clubs!https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/political-registration-and-regulation/financial-reporting/donations-and-loans/public-funding-political-parties

Ed Robinson ● 35d

"All these years in paid opposition I do not think they have a clue."I have been reminded for quite a while of the title (not the text) of a 1972 book:-"Now That You've Got Me Here, What Are We Going to Do?" (subtitle: "a non-marriage manual")Mind you, as their main purpose was the smashing of Corbyn and the Left, it probably is no real surprise that they are dead in the water. Starmer used his ten pledges as bait for the Left. Then he abandoned all or most of the pledges (and the Left)."Keir Starmer has said he is willing to tear up the promises he made during the Labour leadership election if it is needed to make the party electable.In comments which will infuriate Labour’s left wing, Starmer said that his “most important pledge” was to make the party fit for government." (2022)“make the party fit for government." - as it turns out, also unfulfilled. Consistent.

David Ainsworth ● 35d

Some reports suggest that Reeves is Chancellor in name only. If responsibility has been removed then she has effectively been sacked. The problem is do we know who is coming up with the policies for the November (very late) budget?Stuff coming out if Labour regarding taxation is not encouraging. All these years in paid opposition I do not think they have a clue.

Ed Robinson ● 35d

Looks like Mandelson's fall may bring down Morgan McSweeney. Well, Morgan McSweeney is Starmer's Chief of Staff, and strongly pushed for Mandelson to get the ambassador job.So if Morgan McSweeney goes, then who might be next to go?

David Ainsworth ● 35d

Delays on the "Your Party" line it seems - which has still not been created.Sounds like they have recreated the Labour Party with all its infighting!Sienna Rodgers and Craig Murray have both done articles that may be worth a read."It’s Your Party and I’ll Cry If I Want To"https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2025/09/its-your-party-and-ill-cry-if-i-want-to/"End This Horrible Power Struggle"https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/power-struggles-inside-founding-jeremy-corbyns-new-party

Ed Robinson ● 35d

We have his Iraq inquiry voting record (see below). That itself should exclude him.We have whistle blowers from when he was health secretary saying they have no faith in him.We also have a reluctance to call a "full" that the victims want not a "limited" inquiry into the child rapists shielded by British institutions.So I think it is fair to comment on the lack of transparency.Sorry I no longer vote for Labour candidates.How do you think the child victims felt when Mandleson was made US Ambassador?What sort of a person could vote for such a party?
Andy Burnham’s voting in ParliamentAndy Burnham was previously a Labour MP, and on the vast majority of issues would have followed instructions from their party and voted the same way as Labour MPs.Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq warShow votes2 votes against, between 2003 and 2016. Comparable Labour MPs consistently voted against.

Ed Robinson ● 35d

Of course he bangs on about the north, he’s the mayor of Manchester! What do you think he should bang on about, bombing Germany in 1945?

Gerry Boyce ● 35d

I have no objection to northerners or people from any part of Britain standing for office. My objection to Andy Burnham is  that he continually bangs on about the North of England which he claims to represent. Politicians should base their candidacy on what they intend to do, not on where they come from.

Steven Rose ● 35d

I’m not suprised you hold yourself in such high regard, obviously, this is not an opinion I share. Why shouldn’t a northerner be PM? Have you got a smug dislike of them too?

Gerry Boyce ● 35d

Before the last election Sue Hammond and I repeatedly pointed out Keir Starmer's policy flip-flops. By the time he became PM he had ditched virtually every left wing policy which he had advocated at the previous election and on which he had stood to become Labour leader (e.g. a second referendum, freedom of movement for EU citizens, the renationalisation of the utilities, the abolition of student fees etc etc). It was obvious that having, in the face of reality, abandoned everything he believed in, or thought he believed in, there was an ideological void in his head ready to be filled by right wing advisors like Morgan McSweeney and Pat McFadden.  Sue and I and probably others too were criticised on the Forum for our scepticism. Now after a year of hopeless government it is impossible to find anyone one the Forum prepared to admit that they actually voted Labour.  But hope springs eternal on the left. Everything will be fine when Andy Burnham, a professional northerner with no more idea than Keir Starmer on how to run the country, is parachuted into a safe seat, challenges for the leadership and becomes PM.

Steven Rose ● 35d

If all it takes is a one sided article in the Daily Mail from ten years ago to convince you of Andy Burnham's 'grossly unsuitable character, then so be it. I would point out some of his accomplishments in Manchester: lowering homelessness rates, taking the city bus service back into public ownership and reducing fares. Also, he is a lot less tribal than many other politicians, what he calls a 'place first' as opposed to a 'party first' approach.Anyway Ed, who would you like to see as leader of Labour? and ditto for PM?

Gerry Boyce ● 36d

I think people tend to have very short memories and perhaps settle for slightly better than what we got but until we get candidates that are by no means perfect but believe in transparency then little will change."She told The Mail on Sunday: 'While Health Secretary, Andy Burnham presided over a culture of denial and cover-up over NHS care scandals that cost lives in failing hospitals across the country.."https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3094646/Whistleblower-says-Andy-Burnham-grossly-unsuitable.htmlFrom 2013"Burnham accused on Mid Staffs probe"https://www.standard.co.uk/panewsfeeds/burnham-accused-on-mid-staffs-probe-8899378.html

Ed Robinson ● 36d

"Well that was years ago."It was indeed but unfortunately decisions on how MPs vote when it comes to transparency especially on subjects where victims fight for decades matter!Andy Burnham’s voting in ParliamentAndy Burnham was previously a Labour MP, and on the vast majority of issues would have followed instructions from their party and voted the same way as Labour MPs.Consistently voted against investigations into the Iraq warShow votes2 votes against, between 2003 and 2016. Comparable Labour MPs consistently voted against.

Ed Robinson ● 36d

I just posted one example which you have disregarded.Do you not believe the child victims deserve a FULL inquiry?

Ed Robinson ● 36d

Fine, Ed. If you want to make statements without evidence be prepared for them to be disregarded. 

Michael Ixer ● 36d

"Ed’s comments seem remarkably opaque."I'm not in government Jane.I would suggest you do your own research and not rely on other people.I spend a lot of time reading and listening to a variety of views across the political spectrum.But when child abuse victims call for a "full" inquiry after numerous cover-ups then I believe they should have it.

Ed Robinson ● 36d

"Andy Burnham would get my vote."So would he suspend arms, military & intelligence support to Israel given the current situation?

Ed Robinson ● 36d

I agree, Michael. For someone so intent on transparency, Ed’s comments seem remarkably opaque. Specific examples and detail would really help our understanding.

Jane Carter ● 36d

"Of course, he's not an MP, so he would need a by-election first to challenge Starmer ... "Transparency should be at the forefront of every level of government.

Ed Robinson ● 36d

"I think it is fair to say also that transparency in certain areas under his control has been lacking."what's this about?

Michael Brigo ● 36d

Well that was years ago. In the here and now, Andy Burnham would get my vote.

Gerry Boyce ● 36d

"I think it is fair to say also that transparency in certain areas under his control has been lacking." Such as? Examples?Of course, he's not an MP, so he would need a by-election first to challenge Starmer ... 

Michael Ixer ● 36d

"Whaddya mean?"Corbyn won not because he was great but because the rest could not articulate what they actually believed in - assuming they believed in anything.

Ed Robinson ● 36d

Whaddya mean?

Gerry Boyce ● 36d

Perhaps one should remind people with short memories ;) that he lost against Corbyn for the Labour leadership. Yes that fierce debatter Corbyn!I think it is fair to say also that transparency in certain areas under his control has been lacking.

Ed Robinson ● 36d