Burnham unopposed & likely to be PM by mid July

Agree re Reeves and Philipson.

What bemuses me about Starmer is when some people insist he was a ‘decent’ bloke.

How do they conclude that?

Quite so.

And yet, we may soon discover that Burnham is even worse, as soon as his blokey northern schtick has worn off.

Will the real Andy Burnham, please stand up, please stand up….

I think we need to let go of this notion that the PM is the only really relevant person. The immediate team is just as important especially Chancellor, Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Health and Education etc. It would be better for them all to shine and be collaborative and not backstab each other but work really well as a team and have a number of strong personalities who are able to lead.

Angela Rayner I have mixed feelings about. Don’t mind her in the cabinet but really do not think she should ever be deputy again or PM. There is a line, she is not educated enough although otherwise accomplished in some ways.

I didn’t dislike Starmer. He is the kind of man who who make a good father or a good boss, non offensive really, more of a safe pair of hands. Reeves and Phillipson, on the other hand, I truly dislike. And it is definitely not because they are women as I like Mahmood, Yvette Cooper, Jess Phillips. It is literally those two women who I utterly dislike so I really hope they are out. They were like Starmer’s worst sidekicks.

In real life I haven't spoken to a single person who is sad to see Starmer go. Those to the left seem to be delighted not to have to defend his u-turning, those to the right seem to hope it is the first step to a new government. May Victoria Starmer is sad but even then I'm not certain.

That presupposes that the country is united, as one.

It’s patently not.

I haven't seen an entirely rational explanation for why Starmer should not carry on. I have seen, on MN and other sources, why people think Reeves should move on.

The only thing where I have seen excellent comments from Starmer, Reeves, Badenoch, Davey and (I hate to include) Lowe is the unity on the pantomime clown in Clacton.

If they were so terrible surely the Tories would want them for a complete term? The worse the government the better for the opposition.

No it wasn’t comms. They did a huge amount of that with Starmer. It just didn’t work.

Rather simplistic to say get out and make the kind of society you want. How much influence does one person have on everyone else? Very little, I'd suggest.

And Labour's failings are really not about the comms. Again, simplistic (particularly when compared to the employment issues created by them; no comms could offset that issue).

Unlike Thatcher, I believe there IS such thing as society, and it IS made up of individuals who determine what kind of society it is through their actions, every day. So get out there and make the kind of society you want.

I wasn't happy to see Starmer resign - I just wanted him to be better. And despite what some PPs have said, I think Labour as achieved quite a lot in the past 2 years but they haven't communicated it in a way that people can understand, can remember and can get behind. And then they made some massive gaffs..

Andy Burnham has at least set out what his priorities are at the outset. We can understand what fires him up. We all NEED him to work because we all need this country to be better.

Out of the frying pan .... springs to mind, but fine if that's what you think is best for the country.

The one thing nearly everyone agrees with is that we are pleased Starmer and Reeves are gone. The Tories are obviously pleased and presumably Labour are pleased otherwise why did they force out after a mere 2 years.

It doesn't quite say it like that, does it?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrxj5vvey0o

Britain’s main disability benefit is “not fit for purpose” and deters people from taking up work, a government review has found.

A report by Sir Stephen Timms, the social security minister, said Personal Independence Payments (PIP) were not working “as intended”.

It warned the spiralling cost of the handouts, set to hit £41bn at the end of the decade, was causing public support for the welfare state to crumble, but did not propose ways to find savings.

I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand “I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!” or “I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!” “I am homeless, the Government must house me!” and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing!

If children have a problem, it is society that is at fault. There is no such thing as society.
Margaret Thatcher, 1987

It was very unfair in that users of very few services paid the same as people who used a lot. It was highly regressive and a blight on democracy because people dropped off the electoral register in order to avoid it.

It needed adjustment, not banning. It was very fair in the respect of it applying to all adults and not only houseowners.

Exactly. What she said is usually misrepresented. It suits people to quote just the first few words and then no more.
Thank you for using the word 'community'.

Too young, ffs. 🙄 I blame the heat.

Only the people to young to remember the last time it was tried. It brought Thatcher down.

And yet, re poll tax, many many people think council tax should be replaced with a per person charge.