Burnham unopposed & likely to be PM by mid July

Kemi Badenoch has mocked Labour after a party figure claimed Andy Burnham would be their “first woman prime minister”.

Earlier today, a senior Labour figure, speaking anonymously, told The Spectator that Mr Burnham would come into No 10 surrounded by “female advisers and backers”.

They added: “The reason Labour have always craved, but also been cautious about, a female leader is because, in a Labour Government, she could have an unashamedly female agenda, focused on health, education, family finances, and issues like safer streets...

“Along comes Andy, surrounded by female advisers and backers, but more importantly, genuinely passionate about all those traditionally female-oriented issues, and much less so with the bombs and bullets.”

In response, Mrs Badenoch said: “Labour might have changed leader, but they still don’t know what a woman is.”

😂

Over to JKR…

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/2070152896583254434?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2070152896583254434%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2026%2F06%2F25%2Frachel-reeves-backs-burnham-for-pm%2F

Do you think that Burnham will be able to reform the welfare budget?

Given your previous ‘rolling the ground’ comment.

Burnham isn’t thick. He can’t piss off the bond markets or he will be Mr Cabbage especially if he was just in by crowning.
In some ways, it is good he just comes in because he can then simply control the rest of them and whip them. That is what the country needs at this point. No use in spending all our cash on interest and not being safe at all. He has to regain investor and business confidence immediately or he will be toast by Christmas.

Well that doesn’t take much to decipher

A maintained school (often called a state school) is funded by central government and overseen by the local authority (LA) .

Representing state school teachers is one of the primary functions of the National Education Union. It is the largest education union in the UK and represents teachers and education professionals in maintained schools, academies, and free schools across England and Wales.

The polling private school only posts are misinformation.

The NEU represents private school teachers.

We are the largest education union representing teachers, lecturers, support staff, and school leaders, in maintained and independent schools and colleges across the UK.

We have a powerful voice and have been effective in winning improvements to our members’ working conditions and shaping an education system that works for all.

https://neu.org.uk/about

“The minute he stops the triple lock or takes the £10bn out of benefits to fund defence he will become less popular with many people.”

He has to do some of this. There is not really a choice. The extra child benefit should also go to schools where it actually makes a difference to children as it is handled by professionals.
They soften it with pension credit availability and other stuff.
If you put extra child benefit into schools and hire more staff, you also get the economy growing at the same time.

The issue was the benefit involved (PIP) and the changes proposed. Looked like something the Tories had left in a filing cabinet.

Maybe his authority was already going downhill by then but a better manager wouldn't have let himself get in that mess.

How much of a nut zero cultist do you need to be that even the unions don’t want you in charge! Brilliant.

Two of Britain’s biggest trade unions are increasing pressure on Andy Burnham not to pick Ed Miliband as the UK’s next finance minister, arguing that his North Sea oil policy has damaged jobs in the sector.

Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite the Union, and Gary Smith, general secretary of the GMB — two unions that are major donors to the Labour Party — have both pushed the likely next prime minister to choose an alternative candidate to run the Treasury.

Again, context (ain’t it wonderful?)

Starmer failed to get 5 bn of a future increase stopped, from a total welfare bill of, what, 330 bn?

‘Rolling the ground’ or otherwise - it tells you just how stymied Burnham will be.

As others have said - the bond market will straighten him out, however much Burnham thinks otherwise.

I agree with you - Starmer is known to be a populist weathervane - a people pleaser.

There is an excellent piece in the FT, written by a northern journo who has followed Burnham for years.

I will try to share.

The decade that made Andy Burnham
What 10 years covering the Manchester mayor’s many reinventions taught me about the man who wants to lead Britain.

I’m not sure yet between these two interesting posts but I did note Labour MPs talked about Starmer’s authoritarian control on their own party, which is entirely unsurprising, and that Burnham wouldn’t be like that.

Even talk of (much) lower use of the three line whip. If they expect more freedom on votes it could get interesting.

Burnham isn’t thick. He can’t piss off the bond markets or he will be Mr Cabbage especially if he was just in by crowning.
In some ways, it is good he just comes in because he can then simply control the rest of them and whip them. That is what the country needs at this point. No use in spending all our cash on interest and not being safe at all. He has to regain investor and business confidence immediately or he will be toast by Christmas.

I’m afraid that I see things differently - irrespective of who is in the cabinet, this Labour government is run by the back benches and the unions. There is therefore no hope of meaningful reform.

Burnham is a caretaker/hostage, as you prefer, and his downfall is merely a function of time - as ‘two-year Starmer’s’ was.

The backbench problem last year was that they declined to cut PIP.

That was a symptom of Starmer's failure to 'roll the ground' with them.

I actually don't think Starmer was so bad. Under hks leadership, he followed process, waiting times in the NHS reduced, the economy started to recover, the national minimum wage went up ha inf been stagnant for years, he resisted joining in trumps lunacy war, free breakfast club for all kids etc. He listened when people complained about the winter fuel allowance and reduced it's severity. He had a lot of good quality a and sometimes you just need to follow process to get a country back on track. But his downfall was he wasn't a strong character liked by the media, he was 'dutiful instead of 'dynamic'. The best dirt they could dig up on him was accepting a free Taylor swift ticket which I think he paid back! Hardly compares to the last administration level of scandal! And I do believe he probably didn't know about Mandlesons Epstein links or they were played down, but I can see why he was chosen as he had a good relationship with Trump. I note no one is going after the King, our head of state, for resignation/abdication for his brother's links to Epstein and yet the palace must have known about that as he was friends with him after he was charged. I don't know much about Andy Burnham but I really hope he isn't a power hungry style over substance sort of person. Out country needs stability right now, not a change of leadership trying to get to grips with the job yet again. To be fair to Starmer, I suspect he'd had enough of the infighting whilst he was trying to get the job done. I quite liked Angela Rayner too as she seemed good at what she did and was a people northerner, but she came a cropper too and was punished for trying to do the right thing. Let's hope Burnham isn't going to be farage lite.

I’m afraid that I see things differently - irrespective of who is in the cabinet, this Labour government is run by the back benches and the unions. There is therefore no hope of meaningful reform.

Burnham is a caretaker/hostage, as you prefer, and his downfall is merely a function of time - as ‘two-year Starmer’s’ was.