Has Andy Burnham ended up as PM somewhat under false pretences?

[Imdunfer]

Please note that this is from a left wing Labour supporting paper.

It turns out that the marvellous redevelopment of Manchester that was the central plank of his credibility to become PM was triggered by the fall of Mubarak in Egypt in 2011 and what were effectively, or previously close to, bribes set up by the then Tory government to retain our massive defence contracts with the Middle East.

The owners of Man City, recently found guilty of breaking well over 100 financial football rules, are heavily involved. UK developers were excluded from access to large development contracts. Man City was sold a deal including the naming rights to the stadium, owned by the council, for £750k a year when professional rights brokers estimate the market value to be between £10m and £15m a year for the name alone.

The question is, did a local Mayor with no experience outside politics and only a tiny amount of experience of cabinet roles, (3 jobs in 3 years), get to be Prime Minister without a challenge on the strength of the development of the centre of his city that he actually only had a small part in creating?

https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2026/oct/25/thats-the-way-the-city-works-how-the-uae-changed-the-face-of-andy-burnhams-manchester

i experienced it. I remember the bail out. All £137 billion of it.

Yes Blair’s Labour enjoyed the boom even with that risk, so we felt that bust pretty sharply.

If we'd had people in government who understood what they were doing (selling mortgages to people who would never be able to pay them then bundling them up and selling them on in packages that couldn't be unravelled to work out what they were actually worth), then it would have been stopped.

That was happening in the US, not here.

Exactly. I don't think people understand that it underpinned the boom of the Blair years.

I will never forget Gordon Brown saying for several years that Labour had ended Tory boom and bust.

In your own small way, perhaps.

I will not ask where you landed on 137bn.

Then why did British banks like Northern Rock go under or nearly go under if they weren't involved, Blossomtoes?

Why was the US corporation Citibank sacking staff in London if we weren't involved?

Why did the UK need new regulations to separate domestic and investment banking if we weren't involved?

These businesses are international, we were right there in the thick of it as we all know to our cost.

Of course. It was a credit led boom, we even had a credit crunch board for that name on here. A big old spending party built on risk and PFI. Then the bust which our higher risk exposed us to more.

https://fullfact.org/economy/1-trillion-not-spent-bailing-out-banks/

Never heard of the global economy @Imdunfer? And the saying that when the US sneezes, the world catches a cold?

Oh dear.

Yes ‘oh dear’ back to that poster.

Oh dear.

You singularly failed to include the returns from the government equity stakes held in UK banks. You can’t have it both ways, I’m afraid.

Pointless I think. Blair and Labour held up and apart. As pp says they can’t have it both ways.

Northern Rock was exposed because it had the same aggressive selling tactics of sub-prime mortgages to people who couldn't afford them and were likely to default as the US banks.

@Blossomtoes

I am quite content to have this post reported and deleted, but whilst it’s up, please can I request you to stop posting on matters which you do not understand, as if you are an authority, when you are clearly not.

It’s false and misleading.

Why don't you do that then instead of piggybacking on this post.

The returns that took a decade to retrieve from Lloyds and 17 years from NatWest? Seriously?

Which post did you have in mind? Report anything you like. I’ll continue to post as I see fit.

A man has spoken

Why don't you little women just listen....

Anyway, back to Burnham.

After that there-won't-be-an-election pre-election budget, I'm afraid he's looking more like a Mayor running a country than I thought he was when I started the thread.

Having said that I'm not sure there's a government which has a clue how to get out of the debt mountain/stagnant growth pickle that Europe and the US is embroiled in.

It is false and misleading. It’s due to loyalty to Blair’s Labour gov so any criticism of that doesn’t go down well.

@Electra10E

Surely you’re not suggesting only people who work in private sector finance are allowed to have an opinion on the global financial crash?! That would be like suggesting only people who have been on benefits are allowed to have an opinion on whether benefits are too generous or not.

If you disagree with someone’s perspective, surely you debate it on the thread - rather than telling them not to post because their experience, and therefore their perspective, is different to yours. Isn’t the whole point of being on this forum to engage with the opinions of people who come at things differently?

If you actually said which post you’re referring to it would help. Just report it.

Yes back to Burnham. The summer recess is over so his TikTok style leadership will be under more scrutiny.

Would it help if I was trans-gender or other?