Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that John Healey is a hypocrite

7 replies

saveforthat · 31/08/2026 10:13

JH resigned as defence secretary over the budget. Now he is Chancellor, he will not increase defence spending to his own target. Does this not sum up how ridiculous politics is? In what other employment could you switch to completely different roles with no knowledge or qualifications? I work in pensions and wouldn't expect to be able to switch e.g. to marketing if my company had a reshuffle.

OP posts:
tanstaafl · 31/08/2026 10:30

He’d say that as Defence Secretary his job included requesting as much £ for Defence as possible but now he’s Chancellor the picture is much more complicated and unfortunately blah, blah, blah.

quality and ethical behaviour seems to be declining or disappeared.

we have a convicted fraudster and a tax dodging housing minster in the cabinet and they’re the ones with publicly known misdemeanours.

Labour had just over 400 MPs who you’d think they could have found one or two to contest for leadership but they engineered a by election to get the Mayor of Manchester in and one of his first statements was essentially let’s have even more government ( the mayoral programme ) which of course needs to be paid for by more taxes.

CorporalJohn · 31/08/2026 12:34

"He’d say that as Defence Secretary his job included requesting as much £ for Defence as possible but now he’s Chancellor the picture is much more complicated and unfortunately..."

And he'd be right.

Loulou4022 · 31/08/2026 13:50

When he was defence minister his priority was defence spending, he’s no longer defence minister so that’s no longer his priority.

pinotnow · 31/08/2026 14:06

Agree. Yes, he's chancellor now with broader responsibilities, but that's not the point. He felt so deeply about it he had to resign but now he's not so bothered as he can see the bigger picture - the same bigger picture Rachel Reeves and his other close colleagues would have explained at the time but he couldn't see it then? It's pretty clear he resigned to bring Keir Starmer down and being made chancellor was his reward for that. I am so disappointed and sickened by it all.

Distictionpray · 31/08/2026 14:08

pinotnow · 31/08/2026 14:06

Agree. Yes, he's chancellor now with broader responsibilities, but that's not the point. He felt so deeply about it he had to resign but now he's not so bothered as he can see the bigger picture - the same bigger picture Rachel Reeves and his other close colleagues would have explained at the time but he couldn't see it then? It's pretty clear he resigned to bring Keir Starmer down and being made chancellor was his reward for that. I am so disappointed and sickened by it all.

Sadly, I agree.

BigMoandtheEStreet11 · 31/08/2026 14:08

My conclusion is he’d been told there’d been a job waiting for him in a Burnham cabinet
so only a short time out of the cabinet if he resigned.

TemperanceWest · 31/08/2026 14:14

pinotnow · 31/08/2026 14:06

Agree. Yes, he's chancellor now with broader responsibilities, but that's not the point. He felt so deeply about it he had to resign but now he's not so bothered as he can see the bigger picture - the same bigger picture Rachel Reeves and his other close colleagues would have explained at the time but he couldn't see it then? It's pretty clear he resigned to bring Keir Starmer down and being made chancellor was his reward for that. I am so disappointed and sickened by it all.

I agree. I wish I didn't, but I do.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread