What could Andy Burnham do as PM to improve daily life?

[Seasidecatlady]

There are some negative threads about Andy Burnham this morning so I wanted to have something a bit more positive and look at what he could do, if he becomes PM, to help improve our daily lives.

For me it would be:

• re-nationalise water and utility companies and trains
• reverse the national insurance hike for businesses so they can start hiring again and do more to support small businesses in general
• a one off wealth tax to add funding to the defence budget
• reform the student loans system, improve access to apprenticeship and also do more to help job seekers over 50.

Unless you’re a socialist, there’s nothing Andy Burnham can do that will make your life better.

He’ll keep on ‘taxing the rich’ (e.g anyone earning over 50k) and increasing the welfare bill. He won’t fix anything but he’ll bankrupt the country. It’s student union politics at its finest.

I dont disagree with changes to the social contract, but they need to be changed prior to you signing in, ie before you start paying tax and NI

So when I started my NI contributions my retirement age was 60. Its now 68. To change that really should have incorporated people who had NOT yet started paying in and changed it to something like 70. Given that many now dont start paying NI until they're in their early 20s. I started paying NI when I was 16.

So I have no problem with means testing but it needs to start with anyone who is not yet paying NI due to their age.

@VivienneDelacroix- I assume you also think those in the public sector getting 'hefty' defined benefits pensions also shouldn't receive the state pension ?

If their total income is high enough, then, no, they shouldn't get state pension too. We need to means test it at a relatively high level for all pensioners, not just gold plated public sector pensions, but obviously the number of "high income" pensioners is probably higher for ex public sector workers compared with private sector workers, so it's highly likely any means testing would be more likely to hit public sector workers. There's no way that, say, a doctor, "needs" the state pension when they're getting, say, £75k public sector pension and probably a private pension on top. We need to means test it at either £60k or £100k, in line with either child benefit or free childcare/tax free personal allowance.

Do you mean like high up in the NHS pensions because they would probably go off on one if they didn’t get their state pensions

Two parents can have a dual income of £110,000 and still get child benefit. That’s hardly means tested. The point of it should be that children living in poverty get financial help.

The fact that means testing isn't "per household" is also a huge problem that needs tackling. It should be per household. But then again, so should tax. It's stupid that one partner earning £100k gets shafted for tax (and loss of free child care), but two partners earning £50k each don't. The whole system is a mess but we have no politicians of the ability/calibre to tackle the issues so we have idiots like Reeves farting around not really knowing what they're doing.

Those amounts will be mainly public sector and other DB pensions. The average DC pension is really quite low even though a lot of MNters say they have huge pension pots it’s not really that common

Fine. Then there should be some sort of NI refund. Not the full amount as its not calculated like that.

Means test free bus passes for the elderly

Condense university degrees into 2 years and keep the same content. Charging £9K a 'year' (Oct to May) stops social mobility.

I would ban any funding for university unless its a degree associated with a distinct profession like teaching or nursing or social work etc etc

Stop employers asking for degrees for entry level jobs and jobs that you can learn 'on the job'

Those degrees are what the not so bright do. Not many people with decent maths and science degrees do those jobs

Daft.

You do realise that Scotland has free prescriptions and university because we pay more tax! Basic rate is 21% and higher rate (£43k plus) is 42%.

Well, no. You don't pay in for yourself. You pay in for society. People without children don't get a rebate on the proportion they pay towards schools. People being out for themselves and not being focused on a better society is one of the reasons this country is so divided.

Except the equivalent of what is being suggested here is that if I applied for a school place, my ability to access state education for my child should be means tested.

Why not?

Of course. Means testing is means testing. I work in an area of the public sector where pensions are nowhere near (for example) the civil service levels, but I fully support transparent means testing. It'll have to happen at some point, and I fully expect not to qualify for the state pension.

Except it's not. Pensioners have had their working lives and made their choices. Children haven't, they shouldn't miss out because of their parents choices. State education is nothing like a pension. A pension is a paid benefit and should be means tested like all other paid state benefits - as in, any that get money directly paid into your account. Not services such as schools, health, roads, etc.

Make it easier to employ British people.

Reduce red tape to get businesses up and running.

All reliant on having cheaper energy.

Perhaps some prime ministers could be educated on this as well; those who believed that they were God, after being prime minister for a short while. Liz Truss, Boris Johnson, Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher, etc. How did Liz Truss cause so much damage during her incredibly short term as prime minister? Why did nobody in government say “hang on, this mini budget is going to cause disaster!”? Or did they actually, but this is what we didn’t see, to preserve the image of “the PM knows best”?

The thing is, it’s often presented to the public as if it’s all the doings of one person, even if that’s not the reality. Think of the lockdown decisions, all presented as if it was Johnson calling all the shots, with Sunak pleading “please don’t go too far with lockdown, Boris”. Presumably some of his merry men were involved in decisions as well? Think of the way the budget is presented; chancellor making a massive speech (probably written by someone else), as if they were the only one in the know.

Ironically only on wages. The higher rates don’t apply to unearned income!

I'd love to know which party/parties you've voted for since 2010? So many people who seem to be declaring that the country is bust and going to the dogs are the same bloody fools who voted for the party who got us here. And now think that voting for the same shysters with even more extreme policies and different rosette will somehow improve the country.

Start a large scale program of social housing construction

Invest heavily in the transition to a green economy

Reform the tax base, weighting it far more towards wealth rather than income (equalise CGT at least with income tax, institute a land value tax etc.)

Launch a nationwide consultation, in cooperation with other parties, on replacing the voting system with a form of proportional representation and commit to doing so after the next election.

The first two were in the 2024 manifesto. The third one doesn't contradict it, as these are not what anyone understands by "taxes on working people". The last doesn't need to be, as it wouldn't be enacted until after the next election.

We had a referendum on voting reform during the coalition which was rejected. Fair enough it wasn’t full proportional representation but it was a start down that road. But the voters didn’t vote for it. Can’t see any political parties wanting to try again as it was one of the things that led to the demise of the libdems as they had to sell their soul to get the referendum which lost them their voters.

It wasn't proportional representation. But more importantly: the world and politics has moved on massively since then, the two party system has disintegrated and FPTP is showing itself to be completely unsuitable as a mechanism for reflecting popular political will - Labour's "landslide" victory on a third of the popular vote and the likelihood of a Reform government on even less being two obvious examples.

As for parties' support, the vast majority of Labour members support it and it was approved at conference; Starmer has just unilaterally refused to do anything about it. The Greens and the Lib Dems both enthusiastically support it as a core policy. So did Reform until it started looking like they might win a majority under FPTP, when they went strangely quiet about it. I'm not sure what their official policy is now.

That leaves the Tories. But as they'll probably lose most of their deposits at the next GE, who cares? 😁