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

There was only one catch and that was the ‘don’t quote me’ catch, which specified that a poster could demand you not to quote their posts, but they remained at liberty to continue to quote your posts.

Even if you requoted one of your own posts, in the event that the previous poster had already quoted you in a fresh post, you ran the obvious risk of breaching the posters demand not to ‘quote them’.

Many posters were moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this conundrum, and let out a collective, respectful whistle…

And it doesn't say any rules were broken, either.

Am I missing something here? Why do you compare a Starmer non event with Blair?

We will never know - it remains one of life's great mysteries.

What is Keir Starmer up to these days by the way?

No idea. Google is your friend.

I think it's called juxtaposition - the police caution was unlikely as well.

’My money’ (a phrase - am I allowed to use it?) is that he’s sensing Burnham’s blood is in the water, and bent on revenge, is readying himself for the mother of all political comebacks…

Have mercy on us.

I very much doubt it. I sensed relief when he went. He’s likely to be offered some kind of international role better suited to his skill set.

Yeah, I was kidding, of course. You otherwise sensed correctly - many of us were beyond relieved when he went forth.

I would rather Starmer utilised his ‘skill set’ where he is able to do the minimum damage, frankly.

I very much doubt that he’s looking to make a political comeback. He resigned as an MP very quickly.

An international role would suit him down to the ground.

Chagos Governor?

I think pp got a caution confused with a fpn. And two former Prime Ministers absolutely did get one of those.

You just wanted to shoehorn in Starmer.

You've got me

Johnson and Sunak if I recall.

You appear to have an obsession with Starmer, which is odd since he’s no longer an MP.

Margaret Thatcher was mentioned up thread and she is very much dead.

Thank you. Pp did indeed get confused with them.

The joys of being busy and not having everything at my fingertips.

Noooo, it was Johnson and the pole-dancer wasn't it?

It's definitely not reparations though. Oh no, definitely not. Honestly it's not. No, no Mr Fawlty, ees no rat, ees amster.

I do wish people would say where the chunks of text they quote are from. Is this more Telegraph?

Google is your friend here.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andy-burnham-caribbean-aid-slavery-apology-reparations-b3077944.html

Yes that is from the Telegraph.

It is £40m over three years. If that is reparations it is extremely measly. Isn't it just the normal sort of overseas aid the government provides?