Starmer’s chronicles

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Paul

I suspect a lot more are quite happy with the move - do you really want him as PM ?

I don't know his policies but Andy Burnham strikes me as a good communicator, wasn't mates with Mandelson, and his tax affairs are in order to the best of my knowledge.

I would have preferred him over others including Starmer on this basis, but I think we're now left with a bit of a lame duck PM.

Andy Burnham is the man who bothered to listen to real people in Liverpool instead of civil servants and pushed for - and got - a proper inquiry into Hillsborough, which eventually led to the deaths being re-recorded as unlawful killing.

He’s thoughtful, principled and can soak up pressure. He is at least as qualified as anyone else who’s held the job in recent years and I suspect better than most of them. After the stitch-up the other week, however, he might yet turn out to be the best leader Labour never had.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chris

Andy Burnham is the man who bothered to listen to real people in Liverpool instead of civil servants and pushed for - and got - a proper inquiry into Hillsborough, which eventually led to the deaths being re-recorded as unlawful killing.

He’s thoughtful, principled and can soak up pressure. He is at least as qualified as anyone else who’s held the job in recent years and I suspect better than most of them. After the stitch-up the other week, however, he might yet turn out to be the best leader Labour never had.

Then again....

Andy Burnham and Alan Johnson, two former Health Secretaries, turned down dozens of requests for public inquiries into the Mid-Staffordshire scandal, including 20 from fellow MPs...

Non-paywall version

https://archive.ph/yOehA

Originally Posted by Sirius

He needs to fall on his sword. Labour are starting to fall apart and i will be shocked if we make it to the next set time for the next General Election. Once the public see that there goverment is a clownfest that government is finished.

Labour have a big majority, they'll just get another leader after the local elections.

Originally Posted by Chris

Andy Burnham is the man who bothered to listen to real people in Liverpool instead of civil servants and pushed for - and got - a proper inquiry into Hillsborough, which eventually led to the deaths being re-recorded as unlawful killing.

He’s thoughtful, principled and can soak up pressure. He is at least as qualified as anyone else who’s held the job in recent years and I suspect better than most of them. After the stitch-up the other week, however, he might yet turn out to be the best leader Labour never had.

He is as qualified as the rest of them, but his politics are pretty hard to pin down. He has always tended to position himself in whichever the dominant faction within the Labour Party has been at any given time, with two previous failed bids to become leader. He is more left-wing now than ever before, even railing against the government being subject to the Bond Markets. I think a drift from New Labour to this over 20 years is credible, but I am still unsure about him.

When he left Parliament, he was seen as a generic careerist MP whose parliamentary career had stalled. The perception of his talent in politics has increased the longer he has been out of Westminster, but it might just be wishful thinking. It reminds me how fans' views of a football player's ability tend to improve the longer they're injured, until they've convinced themselves their return will solve everything.

So I think he might be a big disappointment if he becomes PM. I don't think he has said anything that proves he is any different from Starmer in having no clear idea of what they want to do. Saying things should improve, that we shouldn't be held hostage by the markets and that we need to listen isn't a plan.

Although that doesn't really make him any different from anyone else, from any party, that could become PM. Everyone's politics at the moment is that we should make public services better without raising taxes, unless you're the Greens in which case you think we should also bring 'hope' back. Whatever that means.

[Sephiroth]

The UK is so broken that nobody with a Labour mentality can fix it. Anyone else will have a torrid time because economic growth comes at a price in public spending.

What a crock.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The UK is so broken that nobody with a Labour mentality can fix it. Anyone else will have a torrid time because economic growth comes at a price in public spending.

What a crock.

The issues with the UK are that:
- Voters want high levels of healthcare, benefits, adult social care but don't want to pay the high taxes that these need. Hence populist politicians who talk of purging excessive spending but can't deliver.
- The UK is a mid-power which punches above its weight diplomatically but can't win trade battles against super powers like China and the USA. The UK's colonial days are well gone and being British counts for less than it did 100 years ago. It's a logical change but one which some have difficulty in understanding.
- The UK suffers from historical poor productivity and Brexit has only made this worse.

It's a tough situation which no politician can easily solve, but will need the British people to reset their expectations first.

[Sephiroth]

Yep - the UK is broken.

[jem]

"Voters want high levels of healthcare, benefits, adult social care but don't want to pay the high taxes that these need. Hence populist politicians who talk of purging excessive spending but can't deliver.”

Sometimes referred to as ‘we want Scandinavian levels of service while paying American levels of tax’ - simply won’t; indeed can’t happen.

Purging excessive spending, ie, eliminating waste is a general go-to for populists, and yes, I’m absolutely sure that you could find ‘waste’ in every public body. The question though is how much would you save by eliminating said waste, and how much will it cost?

Which does sound odd, but hypothetically, you identify a group of people that you think could be let go, because they, apparently deal with some ‘woke’ initiative - say ‘black, one legged, lesbians, in theatre’. Fine - you now need to pay them off; but is that only what they did, or did they do other tasks which now aren't being done?

I used to frequent a similar forum where a particular poster was outraged by the cost of Parliament’s subsidised bar - and used to post that if this and ‘MP’s parties’ were stopped, then it would solve the NHS funding issues! It was absolutely impossible to convince him otherwise. Presumably the difference between a thousand and a million and a billion completely eluded him. Shame really.