AIBU to wonder how a government can be based in Manchester?

Christ on a bike, did you study stupidity at university?

It’s this.
They did the same with Starmer and that’s why everyone claims to hate him now. It was never Starmer. It was the press and social media finding fault with even the most positive thing.

He wants greater devolution, and plans to base the office where devolution has been most successful. I genuinely don’t see why that is an issue, and it looks like people are just determined to find fault with anything he sats or does, just because.

He's only creating an office for a few of his mates in Manchester at the tax payer expense - it is what chronies do for each other. At least he isn't spending his dodgy mates to the US to be ambassador.

It'll damage Manchester.

We need new jobs not relocated jobs with big payoffs for moving.
It'll mess up house prices further.

If we had HS2 you could be in Manchester from London a bit quicker.

Don't know what happened to government office north West. That was in Piccadilly and was another tier of nonsense.

I don't think greater Manchester needs a mayor.
And annoyingly everyone calls him the mayor of Manchester but it is greater Manchester and it's not all great

His drama outside the library during COVID was pure nonsense and really annoying.

He doesn't propose to move 'the government' to Manchester. He proposes to move one specific part of the Prime Minister's office/staff to Manchester, which is a perfectly reasonable idea.

Exactly.

I’m not sure people are listening to what he’s actually saying.

Sounds like a lot of the media are trying to make this divisive just like they do with everything else.

They are also for staff, some of whom are earning just under £26000.

@IdaGlossop

"I'm a hermit now, living in my shed" best place to be shielded from total mediocrity. 😊

The multiple- not one or 2- cafes and restaurants which are run at a loss and subsidised by public funding. As MPs earn approximately £60,000 a year more than I do, and not many of us get these lavish facilities, its excessive. I don't necessarily begrudge them the onsite gym or medical and occupational health team....but I do the bars, cafes and restaurants on their salaries which if they need to be there should be run on a profit basis, not at a defecit. Most of us either take lunches or use outlets that, bizarrely, make a profit. Canteens at some companies that are run for the benefit of their staff are in the private sector. Westminster eateries are propped up by us.

That sounds awful. I hope you gave them a gob full. Abit stupid to correct you under those circumstances.

I'm northern and lived in London for 20 years. Me, I can't abide northerners or southerners. Contempt from proximity. I'm a hermit now, living in my shed.

Think this through. All debating, voting and select committee activity will continue to take place in Westminster. The devolution operations centre Burnham proposes setting up in Manchester will be part of the civil service, so apart of Whitehall. If lots of MPs need to be at briefings on devolution, the Manchester officials will go to London.

So where does it get 'stripped back' apart from the obvious subsidised bar?

@IdaGlossop thank you

Well that's good to know.

He's setting up a new department but hasn't said in detail who will work in it other than his deputy chief of staff, who's Manchester-based already. I would imagine some Treasury and HCLG bods will have to work from Mancester but with remote working and the proximity of Manchester to London, few will have to relocate unless they choose to.

It's working so well now, then?! Fringe benefits that currently include what they do are excessive. MPs should be MPs for many reasons, but not that. As for the bar/security issues, they have to travel from and to constituency in the majority of cases, I've never been convinced by the security explanation as they don't have to prioritise drinking during and after work. Regardless, the current set up is too costly and needs stripping right back.

He did mention the SW in his speech. His whole idea is wider devolution to the regions, so to the regions that don't yet have devo, get at it, to those like GM who have had it for a while - what next on the devo agenda.

It does make sense to me to localise interventions at a level that is big enough to be able to deliver but small enough to recognise sub-regional nuance, rather than a UK/England wide model which forms around the lowest common denominator.

given the morality of all of our politicians, it would not be shocking if someone is quietly waiting in the wings to plunge a dagger.

Gove/Boris de Pfeffel spring to mind

I'm not clear which bits he's taking with him

Would it mean that some people have to move? For their jobs I mean.

RTWT. Only the department making devolution happen. We already cough up for trains and hotels to London as the majority of MPs don't live there.

I wish someone else would step forward. Not because I have any particular issue with Andy Burnham, just because I think some sort of contest would probably be good to test out different ideas rather than having an effective “coronation”.

Fair comment.

In the Midlands?? Manchester? What are you actually on about?!