To be sick of people being so negative about the things Burnham is putting into place

[histrainersbythedoor]

Nobody thinks they’ll fix everything but he’s doing small things that can be actioned quickly and will drastically improve aspects of our lives that have got worse over the last two decades - parking fines, music on trains, vaping on public transport. They’re all small things, yes, but they will make things a little better.

He’s not said anywhere that he thinks that doing these things will save Britain. So why are people acting like he has said that?

True. Whether he and Burnham will listen we’ll see.

Compare first 30 day announcements:

Blair - BoE independence, devolution referenda, NHS reform, utilities windfall tax, incorporating ECHR, joining the EU social chapter, banning handguns.

Thatcher - privatisation programme, right to buy, NHS reform, reversed devolution policy, restricted union striking, reorganising control of education.

Burnham has announced big stuff, but it’s mainly devolution, that he’s then merrily undermining with every new announcement on parking fines and bus tickets.

If he thinks this stuff should be decided in No 10, say so! Don’t say the opposite.

Why do you think that?

Are there any indications that they won't address the bigger issues or is that just your thinking?

Most big things that PMs get done are things they announce early. So first month or two and first budget are a pretty good guide. Maybe the budget will be a radical one but that’s not how the chancellor is pitching it so far.

So, it’s possible, but indications aren’t currently pointing to it.

Nor that Burnham truly believes in local decision-making, given his actions so far. He can’t seem to resist doing things that make sense but are naturally local issues.

Parliament has only just got back after recess and conference season.

True, but that doesn’t affect announcements.

You can announce big things that get legislated later, which is what most PMs do.

At risk of repeating myself, I think he has one or two big ideas, so maybe this will end up being a really important historical PM. But he doesn’t seem to actually believe in his main one, so I’m sceptical.

Where are you getting your recession from? What nonsense.
Currently they are bound by the manifesto that got them into power, so it’s unlikely that there will be significant change this parliament. What he is doing eg with social care is starting a difficult conversation about how to equitably move forward in dealing with the cost of care. Nobody else has bothered to do it properly and it needs sorting. But that won’t happen until after the next general election. People need to give them time. It was the same with Starmer, he was not properly given an opportunity because people want results in minutes rather than the actual time it takes to make meaningful change. The growth we are seeing now is a result of the measures Rachel Reeves took as chancellor, and look at the press she got during her time there. Oh yes and of course they need to stop the boats, it doesn’t matter that crossings/people numbers are down, that’s not good enough 🙄

We actually were in recession in the last two quarters of 2023. We’re already getting growth. Highest in the G7.

Do you want to guess how much of a Uk bank’s profits it currently pays in tax? 46.4%. Amsterdam - 42.2%, Frankfurt - 38.9%, Dublin - 28.9%, New York 27.9%. Now tell me why we should increase taxes further on UK banks?

Banking isn’t a service like say theatre tickets or physio or accountancy where you pay more and expect better. You’d get the same service from a derivatives broker in Amsterdam as you do in London. But when Amsterdam (or Dublin or New York) is charged so much less tax, why would a bank set up in London?

A rise in the banking levy would be so unbelievably damaging. The taxes banks pay are vast. They are the companies that pay the most tax. If they shifted operations overseas and just kept a UK branch they’d save billions and we would lose billions. Taxing banks more would be such a stupid thing to do. Let’s see how intelligent our new chancellor is.

I don’t dislike some of his ideas. I really do not.
He has some at least. Which is more than can be said for Starmer.
He can communicate well. But he does not have a mandate. Nobody voted for him to be PM. And before anyone types away to tell me this is how it works. I know this is how it works. I utterly disagree with it though. If the Labour Party wanted a new leader and are in Government ( or any party does), General election it is. Nobody not one single person voted for Labour with him at the helm.
His weakness is his fetish about ‘Northernness’.This nonsense with No.10 North. And his connections to Manchester City football club. Nobody invests in a city without wanting something in return. And nobody invests that heavily without talking to the Mayor.
Constantly giving people a few crumbs with little things here and there is not going to cut it. He seems to be wandering into Europe again too.
I think people are cautious. He has one or two people who are okay in his team. Otherwise they are pretty dire bunch. So it is not just about him.
And maybe that is another aspect of him. It is not just about the PM. It is a team delivery. But he does have an ego.
I think releasing prisoners early was a terribly bad move. Not talking about immigration a bad move. He has to address that topic sooner or later.
So the cheer leading is not as loud or as long.

I think you and @edwinbearagree, I agree with you too.

I think it's hard to compare a PM who comes in with a change of government with a PM who comes in partway through term. If he makes big changes, there will be a load of "he has no mandate/call an election" comments. There are anyway.

I do agree there needs to be some big stuff, but I am also liking the little stuff.

I think the only PM who has gained office mid term and gone on to win the next GE was Boris.

Thinking of the others, they lost the GE after becoming PM mid term, i.e. Gordon Brown and Rishi Sunak, both of whom (like Burnham) didn't even win an internal leadership election within their party.

What big ticket items has Burnham addressed since becoming PM?

Merely parroting the IMF will not wash, I’m afraid.

Approving drilling in the North Sea?

What like economic facts? Why won’t economic facts ‘wash’? Are people too think to understand them these days? Do people think the IMF has some sort of agenda (it doesn’t)? Is it not giving the right ‘vibes’ so we must ignore it?

What think I’d really good about Jackdaw is that he made the right - environmentally, economically, right for jobs, right for shoeing businesses we want them to invest here - decision but the ‘vibes’ of the decision (ability to virtue signal etc) of this decision are terrible. He made a decision based on facts and not vibes and that’s really, really important and encouraging.

Hopefully he’ll tear up PIP and totally go back to the drawing board on it next. That’s the next big positive action he HAS to take if we are to have any chance of improving this country.

Jackdaw, just now.

What about Rosebank? You do understand why a decision has been delayed on it, right? Do you consider it justified?

Agree with your last para.

Small gestures such as the £2 bus fares isn't actually small. It has an enormous effect on the public.

It means that retired pensioners can get about and socialise, with local businesses getting support. It means that those on a minimum wage can afford to stay in their job and contribute to the economy.

It may seem a small gesture but it does have a widespread economic benefit and contribute to improvement of health.

You’re preaching to the converted - I work in an investment bank, I’m fully aware of this.

An increase in corp tax on the banking sector will ultimately flow through to the consumer, in higher lending margins etc.

Anything but address the welfare budget….

National Care Service
Devolution
Greater public control of essential utilities
Addressing homelessness and social housing
Europe

A FAR better change would be to increase the frequency of buses and improve routes away from the big city centres. Lots of places out in the regions barely have a bus service, lots have no buses in the evenings and very reduced service on Sundays. A price reduction is useless for those who have poor access to bus services.

Which is being worked on, no?