PM Andy Burham: what next for women's (and children's) rights?

Renationalising the transport system in Manchester has had huge benefits. That took a lot of guts.

So he does have this behind him.

I'm fairly familiar with a number of nonsensical decisions made in my own local authority which defy logic and economic sense. The gains are there to be made through good decisions - that unfortunately is where I question it as I know some utterly terrible decisions were made here which have had huge consequences. Our local council debt isn't because the council is insolvent. It has been due to incompetence.

He's going to be in for a rude shock I suspect. The honeymoon won't last long.

The very fact that he avoids journalists' questions for two weeks, then gives an interview to a footballer turned crisp salesman who doesn't exactly press him hard...

I think he expects the same Pravda-style coverage the MEN has been giving him as mayor, and that's not going to happen.

He's a good communicator and great at vibes based politics, but as PM you have to make hard decisions. There's a relatively recent case of a big city mayor, who was a good communicator with a knack for vibes based politics, who thought being PM would be easy.

Press release politics won't last long. Precisely because of the lack of accountability.

I don't know that some of his schemes are 1970s. They make economic sense to put things on national debt upfront rather than to do things through pfi which merely kicks the cost down the road at larger expense with little oversight.

This doesn't necessarily look great on the books but long term it's much more financially literate and cheaper for tax payers.

So I don't think that some of these proposals are hard left. They are just old fashioned common sense rather than fudging for political reasons.

Another worry of mine is that Burnham seems to be deliberately doing all of his (so far rather twee) communicating via social media and actively avoiding questions from the press, plus Labour MPs have blocked Burnham being questioned by opposition MPs in parliament for the time being.

I don't like this, it strikes me as lacking in accountability and prioritising spin, and I'm already annoyed at Labour anointing him as the new PM without any contest within the party.

I have a bad feeling about this new PM: I wasn't impressed by Burnham when he was part of the previous Labour government, and I was right in predicting, during the the 2024 election, how Starmer would behave on the topic of women's rights when in government.

From the various things I've read about Burnham going on about his dislike of Thatcher and how he wants to nationalise and extend devolution, and Manchesterise the country, I'm not sure Labour's really meeting the people where they live.

The country is on its knees: the social welfare bill is extremely worrying (and I have no problem in people receiving help if they need it but this level of welfare spending is unsustainable), the majority of voters are living very close to regular use of overdrafts and credit cards to cover basic living expenses, roads are cratered with potholes, bins aren't being emptied regularly, councils do very little for the upkeep of the local communities, hospitals have impossibly long waiting lists and old infrastructure, water companies are turning the coastline 1970s brown again, and in every part of life there is more and more 'computer says no' bureaucracy from national and local government.

Private sector businesses are champing at the bit to cut staffing because in their dreams AI and robots will do everything they formerly paid humans to do, successive governments have basically outsourced all manufacturing to China so we're at the mercy of a rival power if we want even basic supplies, we still buy fuel from Russia even though we know they're using the profits to continue the war in Ukraine, and we haven't even begun to deal with the excessive numbers of illegal migrants coming here and making life difficult for people living in working class areas.

We don't need an Andy Burnham 1970s-Labour tribute act, we need a government that actually tries to tackle the major issues negatively affecting the country rather than tinkering around the edges and scolding people for using social media in a way that Labour MPs find uncouth.

I really hope this is true. The way she was treated was appalling.

I think he knows it’s last chance saloon for Labour and has picked up that it’s not a vote winner to override women.

I think he’ll just park it mostly and ignore it all.

Maybe it’ll flare up again so could be wrong.

The thing about HNH is that, despite being paid by the government for allegedly being experts on "extremism" (a very elastic term; their definition of "far right" seems to include anyone to the right of Penny Mordaunt), they also function as a rather effective deniable dirty tricks department of the Labour Party.

Also, the Conservatives being in government for 14 years had no impact on their state funding, which tells you something about the state.

Wasn't Rosie Duffield in talks with Burnham to consider returning to the Labour fold. If she does I think that will be a strong signal of the direction of travel.

I think any changes or even action to ensure the Supreme Court judgment is followed will be well down the list of things Mr Burnham considers.

https://x.com/SamCoatesSky/status/2077775219909906912?s=20 - McGregor

https://nitter.net/siennamarla/status/2077805024818737501?s=20 - Phillips

Burnham's hired Matthew McGregor, former Director of Hope Not Hate (and current CEO of 38 Degrees) as Director of Political Strategy, and Alison Phillips, a current board member of Hope Not Hate, as his Director of Transition.

HNH and 38D are both orgs that strongly support Genderism (and the Good Law Project). This doesn't make me feel very confident that a Burnham government will give gender critical women much support or a fair hearing.

Maybe he'll just get on with things that actually matter rather than placating some guys who think wearing a dress makes them a woman.

He has said housing and social care are two massive issues that need resolving so hopefully he'll concentrate on things like that.

Interesting fact! 👌

Incidentally, some of us are also familiar with the very interesting history of "equivocate", which was to do with Catholics during the reign of James 1 disguising the fact that they were Catholics by not giving straight answers to questions about religion.

I can't be bothered with this needless offence taking. I've more worthwhile, less iritating things to occupy myself with.It is common for people to illustrate their posts,or provide links that help to expand or add info. Only those looking for aggro could possibly get upset. Enjoy your afternoon.

Need the laugh react for NowSober's post.

TBH it comes across a bit condescending. Equivocate isn't a very unusual word so I doubt many contributing here would be reaching for their dictionaries. Where do you draw the line?

To be condescending is to treat someone as if you are more important or more intelligent than them.