In terms of representation, Burnham won under the rules we have. That means he has a mandate and is fairly represented. If you want to get into a debate over how electoral reform thats a completely different subject and one for another day tbh. He is NOT the only locally elected official who is arguing for more money in Manchester. He is the most vocal and the one who is technically the most powerful but he's not the only one.
For me the issue is that GM NEEDS to go into T3. This is now something that pretty much everyone I know acknowledges and now feels they have hanging over their hands. But people still need/want to live and plan etc etc. Its starting to feel like restriction hokey cokey.
I know no one wants to live under draconian restrictions.
But
T2 also means no support at all for many, and whilst you have this hanging over people few people are going to make plans to do x, y and z anyway. Lots of local pubs are saying they would be better off in T3. Thats not the case for supply chains and yes thats an issue that needs to be addressed but equally the longer this goes on the longer they'd need to survive without support if none materialises.
It also affects people in GM and beyond. People are not staying in GM as lives do not begin and end at the boundaries. So plenty of people who aren't even eligible to vote are affected by decisions here. People who live on the borders also have a vested in this - be they commuters, shoppers, pub goers, family friends etc.
And yet we have this situation where everyone is in this limbo.
Hancock gave a speech this morning in parliament in which he stated that we couldn't afford a delay in putting in necessary measures. Before going on to say that he was in effect, delaying measures because he and Manchester were in dispute.
Hancock is ultimately top dog, so it doesn't matter what Burnham says. He could just overrule him. But the government don't want to do this for political reasons. Its better for the government to drive a wedge by going "look starmer supports a circuit breaker but burnham is being obstructive about restrictions".
Burnham realises that there is a massive financial problem in GM finances already. Having been in measures for several months and having to fund a local track and trace due to the failure of the national one there are black holes in budgets. The government had initially at the start of the pandemic they would provide all the financial support councils needed. Which turned out to be a pile of rot.
Going forward even more financial issues for GM are really a massive issue. The government doesn't care though, because these are Labour areas and they have form for defunding Labour areas and funding Conservative ones where they can. So Burnham is trying to draw attention and get what the area needs to prevent economic meltdown.
The trouble is he risks a situation reminiscent of miners being starved out of a strike but with hospitals and extended economic hardship.
Plus it will hurt surrounding conservative leaning counties too. So its massively devisive and plays into social tensions.
It also won't help compliance and enforcement in Liverpool.
So all this bullshit is hurting everyone because Hancock isn't showing leadership and Burnham is quite frankly, desparate.