To ask if you watched Andy Burnham’s bloody good speech?

[Househunt2026]

As in actually watched it and didn’t just doom scroll the commentary? It was bold and honest and pragmatic and actually made me hopeful that we have someone at the helm with a vision for a better tomorrow who has Britain’s best interests at heart.

The National Care Service is a masterstroke, paid for out of scrapping the triple lock and the very real savings of reducing NHS bills on A&E and hospital beds for elderly who should be in care but have nowhere to go.

Scrapping right to buy and increasing council control of housing, boosting the technical education track for young people, pushing renewables, nuclear and energy sovereignty, public control of key utilities for water to get bills down and reduce pollution, investing in people & getting them back to work, leasehold reform by Christmas and everyone’s energy bill will be reduced by fast tracking decoupling energy prices from global gas pricing and by having no VAT on energy bills by TOMORROW!

You can watch the whole thing here and be directly informed instead of getting your perspective filtered through all the bots and misinformation peddlers online m.youtube.com/watch?v=jyjTT_55Gi0

‘I am not proposing that the UK considers rejoining the EU.'

We are considering it though - it's all over the media today because of Andy Burnham.

The 4% is based on research on investment, productivity and trade within businesses, including customs data showing a specific reduction in EU exports after the new barriers took effect. The exact size of that loss is open to debate - some put it at higher than 4%, some put it lower - but outperforming two other economies in the EU doesn’t demonstrate that there was no loss.

The OBR’s 4% is a long-run productivity estimate, not a claim that our growth lead should already be four percentage points higher. And while there is debate about the overall size of the impact, there is a general consensus amongst mainstream economists that Brexit has resulted in a loss of productivity for the UK, which has had a negative impact on our economy.

While I do absolutely accept that economics is an imperfect science,I hope you'll forgive me for thinking that the widespread consensus amongst experts in the field has a little more credibility than random posters on MN whose credentials are unknown.

Fair enough, but to me it’s just not a U-turn to say, “"My view is that Brexit has been damaging, but I also believe the last thing we should do right now is re-run those arguments." And then to not re-run those arguments right now (which he isn’t, because he’s not arguing to either rejoin or have a referendum this Parliament) but to essentially say, “but I am going to seek a democratic mandate at the next election to re-open that conversation, because I’ve never changed my mind about Brexit being damaging.”

That being said, I also don’t think U-turns are necessarily a bad thing if they’re pragmatic, and in response to changing circumstances.

Fair enough. I guess the other option might be crisis grants from your local council?

Burnham is definitely better than his recent predecessors but he’s sitting on a time bomb with some of the chancers he has in his cabinet. It’s only a matter of time before one explodes and we will see if he goes up in smoke with them.

The other problem he has is that in today’s globalist world, so much is simply out of his control. Nobody really wants to admit that but the PM is not much more than a talking head and glorified administrator.

He also doesn’t really offer much to anyone with aspirations and to get ahead of the curve financially. He’s still fiddling around when he should have immediately lifted the stagnant tax thresholds.

However, he does seem at least reasonably competent and like a decent bloke. But he will likely be gone by 2029 or indeed even sooner if that time bomb goes off in his cabinet.

Looks like the bond markets are not happy with The King of the North’s speech.
30 year borrowing costs now touching 6%
That’s mortgages up and the repayments on the government debt up.

This is really bad for debtors.
The rate is a full 20% higher than during the Liz ‘shake the lettuce’ Truss budget.

Not in hock to the bond markets my arse.

I take your point, but I still wouldn’t say he is proposing re-joining, he’s saying he wants all the options on the table, and I personally am glad he’s not going to shy away from having a conversation about re-joining - despite it having the potential to harm him politically in his own seat.

I do think the point you made up thread about the uncertainty and how that affects the markets is really insightful though, and something I hadn’t considered.

At the end of the day, to my mind, Brexit has left us in a really difficult position politically and economically, and I’m honestly not sure what the best way forward of it is. For me, Andy Burnham’s approach seems more pragmatic and balanced than any of his opponent’s so far, though.

The OBR’s 4% is a long-run productivity estimate

The OBR's 4% is an assumption based on the average of 13 external studies. OBR economists/analysts do not have the resources or the remit to calculate their own estimate.

there is a general consensus amongst mainstream economists

Relatively few economists have actually produced academic studies though.

I've acknowledged that the evidence is imperfect but it is what we have got. Arguing that it is wrong on the basis of even less evidence is not very convincing.

The OBR publish their appraisals on the gap between their forecasts and reality. Given their margin of error even when forecasting the upcoming year in the autumn of the preceding year, I’ll retain my view that its primary purpose is to provide a number on a spreadsheet that people can point to.

They all are but words aren't actions and aspirations achieve nothing. He's Keir Starmer all over again

Bloomberg economists recently estimated as low as 2% foregone economic output - presumably you are willing to accept their lower estimate rather than a higher one?

I've already acknowledged that there are some lower estimates and some higher ones. The OBR went with 4% because that was the average across the studies that they considered.

Obviously, none of us can possibly know which estimate is closest to the reality. It might suit you to promote the Bloomberg study at the lower end of economic damage. It might suit others to push the studies which argue that the damage has been greater. My own view is that we simply don't know.

The percentage itself will only ever be an estimate. What the different studies do seem to agree on, however, is that there has been real economic damage.

My primary issue with the EU right now is a potential far right government in France and Germany. Also animal welfare standards are higher in the UK and I would like the EU to fall into line.

I get the vibe from some people I know IRL (NOT on this thread) that they think of the EU as the political wing of the Eurovision Song Contest.

In what sense?

All the signs are pointing to a hung Parliament and a coalition of the left. Reform is on the slide and so are the Tories right now. So unless Makerfield boots Burnham out, he will probably be PM again.

Long way to go though. I am not sure what time bomb might go off? Who are you thinking of?

Reform is on the slide

Although not according to YouGov's latest poll - Reform up 4 points, just inching ahead of Labour.

The key priority is to get Burnham out. No one wanted him - not the Labour members and certainly not the country. We should absolutely not be revisiting Brexit so soon after we left. The nation voted and remainers (of which I am one) have never respected the outcome. We solve nothing by reopening an issue that almost broke us as a nation. Time to move on. Let’s get to the next election asap and show this useless Labour government the door.

I think we should have an emergency census, followed by a GE.

I admit I didn't watch the first half because of a meeting, but he lost me when he said he wants Britain for Everyone, no matter where they come from.

I want him. I think he is doing good things, he’s only been in 5 minutes, takes a while to turn things around.

That’s not the whole statement it includes this

He added: ‘I am not proposing that the UK considers rejoining the EU.

‘I respect the decision that was made at the referendum and it is going to undermine everything I have said about strengthening democracy if we don’t respect that vote.’

That changing in four months renders those words empty. So when he says I won’t call an early GE that likely has no weight, and if he says we won’t adopt the euro when re-joining it can’t be counted on.

The euro part is key for me, so empty words that can change won’t be enough.

EU = more sophisticated multilingual people who all want to come together in a spirit of unity and cooperation because it’s a nice thing to do and their countries are all a bit lefty cos Scandinavia. French people are more cultured, Germans are more efficient and we are a bit embarrassingly oiky in comparison (I nearly said gauche 😁). I don’t think the words “National Rally” mean anything to some of the people I know.

@Clavinova Bloomberg are not the only ones looking at this! And would we truly not want a 2% uplift to the economy? Better than stagnation and gloom.

I thought someone might say that.

The three polls published since the Yougov poll (which covered 27-28 Sept)say different Clav. Yougov increasingly seems to be an outlier.

Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 27% (+3)
RFM: 23% (=)
CON: 17% (-2) (ouch!)
GRN: 12% (-1)
LDM: 9% (-3)
SNP: 3% (+1)

Via
@FindoutnowUK
, 30 Sep.
Changes w/ 23 Sep.
electionmapsuk
@electionmapsuk
·
Sep 30
Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 27% (+1)
CON: 22% (-1)
RFM: 21% (-1)
LDM: 11% (=)
GRN: 9% (+1)
RES: 6% (=)
SNP: 3% (+1)

Via
@Moreincommon_
, 25-29 Sep.
Changes w/ 18-21 Sep.
electionmapsuk
@electionmapsuk
·
Sep 30
Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 29% (+2)
RFM: 23% (-1)
CON: 19% (-2)
LDM: 9% (-2)
GRN: 9% (+2)
SNP: 3% (=)
RES: 2% (=)

Via
@Survation
, 29 Sep.
Changes w/ 22-23 Sep.