AIBU to wonder why Burnham attracts so much negativity?

I tend to agree that the whole thing was a stitch up from the start. I know this is how it goes , but it feels wrong. On the other hand, Sir Keir Starmer looked the happiest I’ve seen him in ages yesterday. Probably glad he isn’t working with the back stabbers any more!

'Sunak was unopposed in the leadership election'

He was the chancellor! He had current, relevant experience. This imposter Burnham manufacturered the whole thing with his backstabbing pals. He's gone from metro mayor to the top job even wheeling out Angela who resigned in disgrace only a few months ago.

I've no idea how the media are not obliterating this upstart.

Who is he <in nikki Grahame's voice > springs to mind.

Trouble is, they could have brought in Andy Burnham a year before the GE. They’ve done it too early in my opinion.

Andy B now has three years to get Labour voters back and steer them away from other parties- such as Reform or Greens

If Andy B doesn’t deliver by the next GE, there’s a good chance those voters will be so fed up they may go to other parties.

If Labour don’t deliver , they can’t blame it on Starmer because he’s now gone. Andy is Labours ace card and they’ve played him too early.

He has a ten year plan. That only works if he wins the next GE.

I’ve no opinion on AB at the moment.

But on the steps of 10 Downing Street he said yesterday that there has been 6 PM in ten years , the 7th since 2016.

Yes Andy ,but you’re also to blame for that too..

It feels like a habit now, almost as soon as someone is in office people are out baying for their blood wanting everything sorted out yesterday. While I do appreciate journalists holding politicians to account sometimes it feels more like sport than actual journalism. It whips up a frenzy and then everyone else online follows suit talking them down before they even have a chance. Even for Starmer who I didn't love he was only in office 2 years it's not a lot of time to sort long term systemic issues. No doubt Burnham will be voted out for failing to wave a magic wand and fix the country in the 2 years or so. Then what next reform? Who do we get when they too inevitably fail to deliver and most likely make things much worse? People need to face up to the fact that there are no easy options here and that improvement will take long term thinking, cross party collaboration and some short to medium term pain. At this point we aren't doing it for us but for future generations.

Classism against the ruling class? Is this a thing now?

Haven't RTFT. So apologies if this has been said.

Classism. That's what it is. And snobbery.

Hell probably stick to the what, but have a different approach to the how.

What Burnham does want to do is reverse the deindustrialisation and subsequent societal ills of the Thatcher years. That is why his vision is for regrowth and devolution.

I don't really get the manifesto thing. If both PMs are going to do all the same things (ie what was in the 2024 manifesto), why was change (and disruption) needed?

Yes, DP reported it to me that Burnham "wanted" to take us back to the 70s as well. My first response was "is that what the Daily Mail told you?" And lo and behold....

Oh I agree that whatever they do for people relocating it won’t be cheap once it’s all added up. Seems bonkers to me. All so he can have his northern place to govern from. Arn’t we meant to be cutting back ?

Re 'going back to the 1970s'. Burnham never said this nor has stated as such. This came from the Daily Mail after Burnham said that the privatisation of the 1980s damaged Britain and increased costs for all of us. Not many people would disagree with that.
And we think that tabloids don't influence public opinion, my word.

'He has no mandate '. We do not vote for the PM. We never have. Burnham has already said he will follow the 2024 manifesto. Again this is the influence of the right wing tabloids and the self interest of Reform. Though Farage right now isn't even an MP so has absolutely zero right to pontificate.

Because parties always follow their manifesto... do you need a list?

Oh and that’s def not going to be cheap paying for endless hotel nights and transport! Not to mention the impact on the children of these poor people being transferred - they won’t be see their parents Monday to Friday.

It’s another dud policy that will do precisely nothing to increase productivity and morale in this country, and it will cost millions, money we don’t have.

This is the bit I find strange:

It proposes transferring teams from Whitehall departments, including the Treasury, Cabinet Office, and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government – all of which are now being led by secretaries of state from the North of England.

They are not always going to be presumably? I know that MPs have always had to go to London but it is important they attend Parliament often.

Don’t relocate people , let them stay in a cheap hotel for a few nights and some travel expenses. Far cheaper. The new PM seems determined to govern from two places, but the country can’t afford to spend huge amounts to do it then cuts have to be made or you keep it as it is.

Do you have any idea what you’re talking about? You said you don’t know enough about digital ID but you’re defending him against what has widely been called a ludicrous misstep by the sector? The reason politics is so hard to discuss now is how bipartisan it is, you can respect a person without agreeing to everything they’re doing, stop defending something you don’t understand.

So he’s not been doing anything for a few weeks, he just asked them to do it this weekend … right

He is already deviating from the manifesto so the party majority won’t suffice now, the public voted for the manifesto that is now null and void. Luckily for us at least half the Labour Party are against Burnham so he won’t be there for very long.

I have been a civil servant for a long time, I am a Labour voter myself, but I have not seen anything this chaotic since Covid. He asked ministers to draw him up plans on the weekend and made the decision on Monday, this was not policy he had been carefully considering, if he doesn’t know much about something that’s a reason to take some time, but he’s trying to shape his image on getting stuff done, whether it’s actually good be damned.

People are focusing on the supposed "coup", but do you really think this kind of Machiavellian politics doesn't happen in every party? Leadership becomes untenable when a Prime Minister loses the confidence of their Cabinet and parliamentary colleagues. We've seen it with Labour, the Conservatives and countless governments before.

As for Burnham "suddenly becoming Prime Minister", he was elected as an MP in a decisive by-election. Like every other MP, his democratic mandate comes from being elected to Parliament. You might not like the system but all parties 'benefit' from it.

If the objection is that Labour didn't hold a lengthy internal leadership contest, I'm actually glad they moved quickly. The country doesn't benefit from weeks or months of a government effectively standing still while politicians campaign against one another.

And as for the calls for a general election every opposition party demands one when the government changes leader. That's opposition politics. Once they're in government, they invariably discover there's no constitutional requirement to call one. Funny how that works.

Building No 10 North - Re:State

Some saying we need to know more about him, you saying he’s deciding things too quickly, he definitely can’t win.

Do you assume every new PM didn’t bother thinking about policy before they were elected? What about Bj who was so shocked when leave won the referendum as he didnt have a plan?

Sunak’s rise to power was not dissimilar to Burnhams and yet somehow that gets conveniently forgotten … Sunak was unopposed in the leadership election. And all the tabloids have already started on Burnham, making him out to be scheming and untrustworthy. Yet some of these commentators were Boris’ biggest fan club. And so it begins… unless people learn to be more discerning about the stories they ingest about our political leaders we will be back here again in about 18 months and everyone will be asking: why do we keep changing PMs?

I’m neutral about Burnham right now, let’s wait and see, give him a chance before trashing him when he’s barely walked through the door of no 10.