Andy Burnham - how can this be allowed?

The bond markets react badly to any political instability and right wingers and neo-liberals always manage to blame it on the left.

Burnham may have rowed back his comments about the country being in-hock to the bond markets, but he isn't wrong. The bond markets were instrumental in spreading the damage caused by the subprime markets through poor risk assessment and lack of regulation.

It's time the country stopped planning it's future based on what the markets react to whether that is a chancellor crying or the fact that a possible candidate for Labour Leader hurt their feelings.

Government debt was 35.5% in 2008 before the financial crash. Since then it has gone up exponentially. It was 64.4% in 2010, 80.6% in 2015, 79.6% in 2019 and 94.1% in 2024.

It grew year on year under the Tories - despite more and more cuts in public spending and record tax increases (at least for working people), because cutting public spending stalls growth.

Investment in public services is not a bad idea at all, because improved infrastructure increases production GDP and overarching GDP which means that there may be more borrowing and spending but that borrowing, as a percentage of GDP is reduced!

We know investing in public services works - we saw it between 1997 and 2008 when public services improved but debt remained stable. We know doing it the bond markets way doesn't because we've seen the damage done over the past 14 years!

It's time to do things differently!

Just to be sure, this IS sarcasm right? 🤔

Just to be sure, this IS sarcasm right? 🤔

Agree Labour have been costly and expensive. But so will Reform hit the ordinary person.
An NHS voucher who knows for how much. And health insurance required for each member of the family.
Pensions. It is unlikely to be one for most. Bar the destitute.
And many of their policies simply don’t explain the ‘how’. Or how they will meet the cost.Or even if the policy is actually doable.
eg. You cannot deport a person to a country that the country does not accept that they belong to them.
Build manufacturing. Doing what ? With what money ? Detail is horribly lacking.
All over the place.

@FulsomSparrow I could have written this.

I voted Labour in the last election because our conservative mp was a drunk and a joke. i liked the labour candidate and they have proven to be excellent. but would i vote labour again after this? no I wont 100% will not.

all those saying "oh but reform will never get a majority and form the govt" are most likely the same numpties who said "oh but the uk will never vote for brexit" and then were shocked when they did.

there are so many people on mumsnet who have no idea what is happening out there and how many older people ex labour voters who actually bother to go out and vote will be voting reform. because quite frankly they are sick and tired of the shenanigans of the labour and conservative parties.

they arent sold on the ideology. they arent all rascist, sexist, homophobic, transgender haters. they are just normal people who look at this shit show and think how on earth can I make it stop.

politics reflect life. too many people not willing to stick at anything that want instant gratification that think if its not exciting then it must be shit.

they dont value steadiness, thoughtfulness and its all shortermism. why are 30 second tiktoks so popular do we think?

at some point someone and I had hoped it would be starmer has to say enough of this shit. get behind me as leader or get out of the party. he needs to say stuff and stick to it.

as for Burnham well isnt this what was doomsday in previous elections? you elect a moderate labour govt and end up with a left wing one, something the labour party can only force through by stealth? if they elect burnham they will be out of power for decades. but i guess thats short termism for you.

This stuff really should be taught in schools. It's shocking that so many people don't understand how our system of government works.

Did you say the same about Theresa, Boris, Liz, or Rishi?

You brought up the issue & I thought that this was a good example of the contempt these MPs have for their voters. There have always been odd occasions of MPs crossing the floor of the house but I think it's unprecedented to have four MPs in the chamber elected as the member of one party sitting as members of another. The fact that all four gave up the Tory whip to sit as MPs for Reform UK Party Ltd is notable.

Costs is a better point than claims that this isn't democratic. I live in GM so not especially excited about the money involved in a new mayoral election.

“The results will be interesting as they will be a useful barometer of whether Burnham as a person can see off Reform, which he would be required to do in a GE.”

It is pretty arrogant to assume that none of the other parties matter in the next GE? Green, Lib Dem, even Torie?
Why already crown Reform as de facto opposition?
When what is going to happen in terms of coalitions etc is anyone’s guess at this point.

The whole saga is utterly baffling.

Am not a Reformer voter either if you are fishing.
I have no particular affiliation to any particular party.

I do wonder, and unlike you I'm not one for house punts, whether this is all because you read 'majority' as 'win' in my initial post and don't want to admit it or whether you genuinely are so partisan that you think nobody who doesn't support a political party would ever acknowledge that they won a thumping majority in a UK election.

What I do know, though, is that you realise you've absolutely no answer to give to my question about the 1997 and 1945 elections that won't let me call you a tit again, so you had to resort to bosom hoiking instead. To give you fair warning, I'm absolutely going to keep pushing this point if you continue, so you can make an informed decision about whether to back yourself into that particular corner.

Reform might have to get a new policy at this rate, I reckon if their policy was "Let"s just get rid of Labour" they would still win.

https://thepienews.com/uk-study-visa-applications-plunge-40-in-april/

Or the Labour Party could just sit down with Rachel Reeves and her fiscal rules and avoid much of the drama!
But I guess Cloud LaLaLand is more what? Entertaining?
Not for the electorate and all of us who are paying hundreds of pounds extra for the shenanigans.

In order to parachute in an alternate candidate (as Labour have done), the sitting MP has to resign. I can't imagine any Reform MPs (or indeed MPs of any stripe) volunteering to do this, and they cannot be forced by their party.

I mentioned laughing in response to the PP who said she and others want Reform to win over Burnham, despite not supporting Reform because it would be 'hilarious'.
I'm sure there are many reasons people might prefer Reform to win this seat than Burnham, ranging from support for Starmer, to belief in Reform, and indeed to thwart what they might see as manipulation.
But the idea that a significant proportion of people would want a Reform MP because it would make them laugh, suggests a very low level of intelligence in the electorate, which is actually quite insulting.
The results will be interesting as they will be a useful barometer of whether Burnham as a person can see off Reform, which he would be required to do in a GE. If he can't, it makes sense to know now. And presumably if he loses he will simply continue as mayor of Manchester, which hardly makes him a laughing stock.

Yes, Reform taking the seat would be entertaining indeed.

It's because of the clear-out that there isn't a decent candidate in the parliamentary party at the moment, at least not one prominent enough to win a leadership bid and given the iron clad control Starmer's supporters had on the NEC up until recently, I suspect that most of the new lot are from the same neo-liberal view point or are total yes men / women as anyone else would have been weeded out at selection.

In the bid to get rid of Corbyn the neo-liberal side of the party also got rid of all of the prominent and experienced centre left democratic socialists, with one or two exceptions.

The ones that are left are either not leadership material (for example, I love Jess Phillips, but think she's much more effective as a firebrand agitator - I don't think she'd be good at the compromises needed to be PM and I wouldn't want her to have to compromise) or too tainted by the Blair / Brown era and their personal connections (e.g. Yvette Cooper).

People keep calling Starmer a democratic socialist - whether he is or not personally, he's not running his government that way. If he was he wouldn't have put Rachel Reeves in as chancellor and there would have been much more effective change.

Burnham should have got the Gorton and Denton nomination - it was short sighted of Starmer to block it and it has probably hastened his demise.

The Makerfield seat might be a bit of a swizz in how it has come about, but it's not a true 'parachuting' in given his connections and proven track record in the area.

If Burnham does win Makerfield and then the leadership and he is as effective as I think (hope?) he will be, then no-one will care by the next election how he ended up there.

It is a risk and the electorate may well protest.

And looking back in the future, Labour have a huge majority in Parliament and could do so much if they actually got their act together. All very depressing for most of us!

I do not think it is about “laugh” @5128gap - many are protest voting and have been since Brexit. It is important to understand that. It is not personal, it is about the system and their role in it.
And if you throw the weight of a technical electoral system at them and they feel manipulated yet again, of course the risk of a protest vote goes up!

And then what?

I would find it incredibly depressing if I had to sufficiently under estimate my fellow citizens to imagine yours was a widely held view.
If people support Reform because they believe they would be the best to govern, then that's one thing. But to want them to win because its all 'a laugh', and to be able to put any antipathy towards their policies aside in a wave of hilarity (wry or otherwise) makes the electorate sound like a bunch of half wits.
And I've more respect for my fellow citizens than to imagine them as that.

I think you misunderstand. There’s a 6 month wait for members to vote so this is not a Labour specific problem.

I don't think people understand the support Reform has at the moment. It is immense. Burnham the poster boy won't even scrape the surface of the electorate in a local election. His political career will crash and burn. It will be hilarious.

Well I’ve obviously riled you since you’ve had to resort to petty name calling. And I still stand by my argument that winning an election by gaining the votes of a mere 20% of the voting-age population is nothing to boast about. As for your second paragraph, it’s so childish and ridiculous that I’m not even going to dignify it with a response.
And yes, it’s pretty obvious you are a Labour voter. I’d bet my house on it.

“They are all terrified of him - which is a very good sign indeed!”

@BloominNora Who is “All”?
Certainly the bond markets seem terrified today which is also costing the taxpayer, aka all of us!

The trouble with Labour left factions is even if you tell them exactly why it is a bad idea and cite economic evidence and legal precedent, they will still find ways to blame on the “Right”, “all”, the right wing media.
Rather than actually go with the rationale truth.

We are all screwed and some!

The thing I think is not on is when there is no by-election because the sitting MP has decided to join a different party. That is way worse. People who voted one way for one political party find they are lumbered with a person favouring policies from another.

Four of the eight Reform UK Party Ltd MPs were elected as Tories. It's a great party for turncoats.