Page 19 | Andy Burnham - how can this be allowed?

Boopybop · 2026-05-15T09:21:21+00:00

I know that there is a long way to go over the coming weeks, with by-elections and leadership challenges. But fundamentally - how can it be right that a man who was not even a candidate in the General Election, was therefore not voted for in the General Election - become Prime Minister? Effectively, the people of Makerfield are selecting the country’s new Prime Minister (as it is pretty obvious that AB would win a leadership contest). This feels wholly undemocratic in every way. AIBU - Andy Burnham has every right to become PM AINBU - it is not right that a by-election in Makerfield can determine who the next Prime Minister will be

NannyOf8Girls · 15/05/2026 11:20

I'm in Makerfield and not happy that Josh Simons is giving up on us.

AlcoholicAntibiotic · 15/05/2026 11:20

OnePeachCrow · 15/05/2026 11:02

The constituents of Makerfield voted for an MP to represent them less than two years ago. Now he is standing down not due to illness or some other adversity but purely to get Andy Burnham back into parliament so he can run for the leadership. I think Josh Simmons is treating the people who elected him with a total lack respect and if I lived there I would be voting for whoever was most likely to beat Andy Burnham.

Show quote history

Yes, same.

Andy Burnham has presumably known the rules about who can be the Labour Party leader for quite a while. If he had ambitions in that area he had the choice to stand in the last General Election. He seems to want to have his cake and eat it, and the last thing the country needs is yet another self-serving ambitious PM.

I’d feel differently if there happened to be a by-election because of illness or another genuine reason. But for someone to stand aside “for” AB seems an example of jobs for the boys.

Also, it doesn’t seem a great advertisement for the Labour Party if they don’t believe a single one of their current sitting MPs is up to the top job, does it?

shuggles · 15/05/2026 11:19

askmenow · 15/05/2026 11:17

Yes I remember this too. He becomes notably bashful when challenged. He looks insecure, uncomfortable and stands biting his lip like a child. The body language isn’t right.
I just don’t see this happening hopefully.

Show quote history

You know, just because someone doesn't perform well when being interrogated, or doesn't perform well when speaking in public, doesn't mean they are a bad or ineffective leader.

Northermcharn · 15/05/2026 11:19

the80sweregreat · 15/05/2026 10:58

An LBC presenter made a good point today that it’s short term pain for long term gain ( possibly ) If they have this leadership challenge soon ( with Andy Burnham or not ) then in a year’s time it’ll be old news and labour can crack on with a new PM. All very simplistic I know, but it made sense to me and yesterday it didn’t. Keir Starmer is weak at the moment and it’s bound to happen sooner or later. He can only bunker down for so long. I feel they will just wait now for this by election and see what happens there.
It’s a long haul, especially for AB.

Long haul for AB? He's been around the world and back again at least twice as part of his oft thwarted political ambitions. Long haul is a packet of crisps and a coke in Economy for him.

Oblahdeeoblahdoe · 15/05/2026 11:19

Boopybop · 15/05/2026 10:29

I am not (and never will be) a Reform voter. But this outcome would be hilarious!

Show quote history

It would not be fucking hilarious!

HRTQueen · 15/05/2026 11:18

OnePeachCrow · 15/05/2026 11:02

The constituents of Makerfield voted for an MP to represent them less than two years ago. Now he is standing down not due to illness or some other adversity but purely to get Andy Burnham back into parliament so he can run for the leadership. I think Josh Simmons is treating the people who elected him with a total lack respect and if I lived there I would be voting for whoever was most likely to beat Andy Burnham.

Show quote history

and going through the democratic process you would have the choice, if you were a constituent eligible to vote in Makerfield to not vote, to vote for Burnham or another person running

that is not undemocratic

questionable in many peoples eyes but its not undemocratic

Hallamule · 15/05/2026 11:18

Boopybop · 15/05/2026 10:27

Oh - I have been paying a huge amount of attention thanks, and I fully understand the process. However, the fact is that the people of Makerfield are likely to choose the next Prime Minister. A person who didn’t even stand in the ‘actual’ General Election. Just does not sit right with me at all.

Let’s face it - yes, the process is that in a GE - you vote for your local MP. In reality though, in a GE - people are voting for who will be the next Prime Minister. Andy Burnham was not voted for in the General Election.

Well I dont know about you but most people vote for the party not the person.

user293948849167 · 15/05/2026 11:18

It does seem insane but at the general election people were voting for the party not the leader so AB is well within his rights to enter a leadership contest and end up PM if he is voted in by the party.

askmenow · 15/05/2026 11:17

Ludmilaandthelonely · 15/05/2026 11:03

I am old enough to remember Andy Burnham the first time and he was 'average' in parliament. I distinctly remember him literally running away from a journalist asking him questions when he was health secretary. When did he become this 'saviour' of the party/country?

Yes I remember this too. He becomes notably bashful when challenged. He looks insecure, uncomfortable and stands biting his lip like a child. The body language isn’t right.
I just don’t see this happening hopefully.

LemonTT · 15/05/2026 11:17

I suppose the question is what he will do if he doesn’t become leader of the party and PM. Will he then resign as MP to become Mayor. Burnham has shows he thinks being Mayor is his preference over being an MP And being the PM is his preference over being a Mayor.

Burnhams vision is all about Burnham and he serves himself not party, not constituency, not the city and not the country.

I wouldn’t turn out to vote Labour in this by election.

shuggles · 15/05/2026 11:17

@Boopybop Would you prefer the American system in which the president is virtually untouchable for their 4 year term, and there's not really any way to get rid of a president who is performing badly or who is unpopular with the public?

And also the fact that American presidents are only in place for 4 or 8 years, which limits the change they are able to make?

The benefit of the British system is that it's easy to get of a PM who is performing badly, and also a PM who is performing well can stay in for 10 years or more.

SweetSummerHerbs · 15/05/2026 11:17

patooties · 15/05/2026 11:14

Burnham is a GOD over there.
seriously.

Show quote history

He's not, he's just a Very Naughty Boy!

Those who present him as a God have the loudest mouths, in much the same way as empty vessels make the most sound.

There is a good number of people in Manchester-and I know several on them-one is my mum!-who know him what he is is-a self promoting wind bag, good for nothing except blowing hard.

MrsOni · 15/05/2026 11:17

YANBU.

If labour end up replacing Starmer that person will be the 7th PM in 10 years. At some point we just need fucking someone to be in the job for more than 5 minutes.

SnappyUmberLion · 15/05/2026 11:16

Boopybop · 15/05/2026 11:12

So many people saying that I don’t understand how the political system works. I can assure you that I do - and I understand all of the comments about ‘you vote for your own MP, and not the Prime Minister’. I am questioning whether the process (which I fully understand) is democratic in this circumstance.

I’ll give another example. An extreme example I admit, but just trying to share where I am coming from.

Let’s say that Reform are in power. They are having a leadership challenge. They decide to parachute Tommy Robinson (not an elected MP) into a byelection to stand for MP - purely so he can challenge leadership. Would this be acceptable? Before people start laying onto me saying that this would never happen, and I’m being ridiculous - I know this will never happen and I know I’m being ridiculous - but if it were to come to pass, I’m sure that the ‘left leaning’ people on here would be up in arms about it. But the reality is, a political party is parachuting a person in, who was not an elected MP at the time of the General Election, purely to become Prime Minister. I KNOW its the correct process, I understand this process
but it just feels like a strange loophole to me.

AIBU is almost 50/50 at the moment, so quite a few people feel the same as me

Edited

Yes, it would be acceptable. If Robinsons, as odious as he is, won a by-election and was selected as the leader of Reform, he would command a majority in the Commons and therefore become the Prime Minister. Under the present system, this is as it should be.

HelenaWilson · 15/05/2026 11:16

The populace dont elect the pm. Each party's members elect a leader. The leader of the party in government is the pm

Usually but not necessarily. There is no law to say it must be. For one thing, someone resigning as party leader doesn't mean he or she has also resigned as PM. That only happens when he or she tenders his/her resignation to the sovereign. If Josephine Bloggs resigned as party leader but could still win a vote of confidence in the Commons, she could continue as PM. That places the authority with MPs in the Commons, where it should be.

The sovereign appoints the PM. If a PM resigns, the sovereign sends for the person most likely to be able to command a majority in the House of Commons and invites him/her to form a government. Normally that would be the leader of the party with the largest number of seats, but need not be. It wasn't in 1940.

It would be a major departure for the King (acting on advice) to do this, but our (unwritten) constitution does allow for it.

Stoicandhappy · 15/05/2026 11:16

Boopybop · 15/05/2026 11:12

So many people saying that I don’t understand how the political system works. I can assure you that I do - and I understand all of the comments about ‘you vote for your own MP, and not the Prime Minister’. I am questioning whether the process (which I fully understand) is democratic in this circumstance.

I’ll give another example. An extreme example I admit, but just trying to share where I am coming from.

Let’s say that Reform are in power. They are having a leadership challenge. They decide to parachute Tommy Robinson (not an elected MP) into a byelection to stand for MP - purely so he can challenge leadership. Would this be acceptable? Before people start laying onto me saying that this would never happen, and I’m being ridiculous - I know this will never happen and I know I’m being ridiculous - but if it were to come to pass, I’m sure that the ‘left leaning’ people on here would be up in arms about it. But the reality is, a political party is parachuting a person in, who was not an elected MP at the time of the General Election, purely to become Prime Minister. I KNOW its the correct process, I understand this process
but it just feels like a strange loophole to me.

AIBU is almost 50/50 at the moment, so quite a few people feel the same as me

Edited

Nothing about Tommy Robinson is “acceptable “ but yes, that would be within the rules so democratically an option.

VioletandMauve · 15/05/2026 11:15

patooties · 15/05/2026 11:14

Burnham is a GOD over there.
seriously.

Show quote history

Where - in Manchester? Because he’s really not considered that there.

Namingbaba · 15/05/2026 11:15

While the parliamentary system means you don't vote directly for the PM, unless he's obviously the MP in your area, the PM is important for directing the party and the policies. I think in an ideal world were Andy Burnham to become PM he would hold a snap election to gain legitimacy.

patooties · 15/05/2026 11:14

the80sweregreat · 15/05/2026 11:10

Reform are probably relishing this upcoming by election. They won every council ward only last week.
It’s not going to be a walk in the park. It might be close, but I wouldn’t bet on AB winning this.

Burnham is a GOD over there.
seriously.

BrownBookshelf · 15/05/2026 11:14

Boopybop · 15/05/2026 11:12

So many people saying that I don’t understand how the political system works. I can assure you that I do - and I understand all of the comments about ‘you vote for your own MP, and not the Prime Minister’. I am questioning whether the process (which I fully understand) is democratic in this circumstance.

I’ll give another example. An extreme example I admit, but just trying to share where I am coming from.

Let’s say that Reform are in power. They are having a leadership challenge. They decide to parachute Tommy Robinson (not an elected MP) into a byelection to stand for MP - purely so he can challenge leadership. Would this be acceptable? Before people start laying onto me saying that this would never happen, and I’m being ridiculous - I know this will never happen and I know I’m being ridiculous - but if it were to come to pass, I’m sure that the ‘left leaning’ people on here would be up in arms about it. But the reality is, a political party is parachuting a person in, who was not an elected MP at the time of the General Election, purely to become Prime Minister. I KNOW its the correct process, I understand this process
but it just feels like a strange loophole to me.

AIBU is almost 50/50 at the moment, so quite a few people feel the same as me

Edited

What it would not be is undemocratic, at least not within the parliamentary, non directly elected PM system we have.

Original poster

Boopybop · 15/05/2026 11:12

So many people saying that I don’t understand how the political system works. I can assure you that I do - and I understand all of the comments about ‘you vote for your own MP, and not the Prime Minister’. I am questioning whether the process (which I fully understand) is democratic in this circumstance.

I’ll give another example. An extreme example I admit, but just trying to share where I am coming from.

Let’s say that Reform are in power. They are having a leadership challenge. They decide to parachute Tommy Robinson (not an elected MP) into a byelection to stand for MP - purely so he can challenge leadership. Would this be acceptable? Before people start laying onto me saying that this would never happen, and I’m being ridiculous - I know this will never happen and I know I’m being ridiculous - but if it were to come to pass, I’m sure that the ‘left leaning’ people on here would be up in arms about it. But the reality is, a political party is parachuting a person in, who was not an elected MP at the time of the General Election, purely to become Prime Minister. I KNOW its the correct process, I understand this process
but it just feels like a strange loophole to me.

AIBU is almost 50/50 at the moment, so quite a few people feel the same as me

OP posts:

FinchiePink · 15/05/2026 11:12

Paganpentacle · 15/05/2026 11:06

We do not vote for a PM.
We vote for the party.
Burnham may be voted in as an MP... what happens after that is anyone's guess.
If he wishes to stand as party leader his fellow MP's decide whether to support that or not.... the general public has no say- which is standard.

You don't vote for either the PM or the party, technically.

You vote - or you're supposed to anyway, I appreciate that's not how many people actually do it - for the person you think will best represent your local area and it's interests in parliament. The majority of the time, that person will be tied to a political party.

I think a lot of people forget this and vote for a party or a prime minister and then turn out to he a bit shocked when their local MP is a bit shit.

SnappyUmberLion · 15/05/2026 11:11

NotAnotherScarf · 15/05/2026 11:08

What i find odd from someone who takes an outside look at politics is that the labour party, that bastion of morality and doing the right thing outside of power, quickly turns into the tory party when in power. However, the tories do everything in secret and without making themselves look sleazy (in regards to party back stabbing anyway)

If you recall Blair promised to stand down for Brown who put him in power and only did so when the shit was about to hit the fan and the gloss had worn off.

One only has to wonder why someone would walk.away from a job that pays £100k a year after years of working to get there to give the job to someone else.

Blair probably didn't honour that agreement, at least in part, because he could see that Brown, although a fine parliamentarian and excellent administrator, could not connect with the electorate anywhere near as well as he (Blair) could. And, he was right.

BrownBookshelf · 15/05/2026 11:10

Alltheprettyseahorses · 15/05/2026 11:06

Well, as PPs have said, if he won he'd just be an MP until and if he won a leadership challenge. Makerfield would be electing a PM in exactly the same way as any other constituency that has a party leader standing to be an MP and govern with the largest party just like Holborn and St Pancras did. Although I get what you mean, it will feel like a coronation - but only if Burnham gets past the many obstacles in his way.

As an aside, I don't think he should be allowed to stand. He's been an MP and chose to resign and I don't think election candidates should get a second go, whether that be carpetbagger Farage, someone like Mary Creagh who lost and was incomprehensibly picked to stand again, or an opportunist like Burnham who has his eyes on any prize going. Other people will make far better candidates anyway and these have had their chance and in Burnham's case thrown it away.

That sounds a bit undemocratic in itself. Why shouldn't I be allowed to vote for someone who used to be an MP and now isn't? Of course we need to have some rules about who can stand for Parliament for practical reasons, but those should be kept to a minimum.

the80sweregreat · 15/05/2026 11:10

Reform are probably relishing this upcoming by election. They won every council ward only last week.
It’s not going to be a walk in the park. It might be close, but I wouldn’t bet on AB winning this.