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

Double post.

I have not seen any undercover reporting regarding the Greens, have I missed it?

Nobody is hunting you, frankly you're not that important.

Perhaps if you are finding it difficult to cope with the viewpoint of others, to the point you feel you are being hunted, then you should take a break from the forum and concentrate on self care.

You won't need to see any undercover reporting; their antics are shamelessly overt. I do look forward to the next party to have their antics uncovered though. I think we should all welcome undercover footage to be applied equally across all parties. They all work for their electorate, after all.

No thanks. I'm fine as I am.

As MNHQ has said in the past, disagreement from several posters doesn't equate to a pile on or hunting, LHF. You have very strong opinions and so people will respond.

I think we should all welcome undercover footage to be applied equally across all parties. They all work for their electorate, after all

If wrongdoing is suspected, I absolutely agree. And to be fair, Labour has been under intense scrutiny from July 2024. To the extent that it has been invasive om a personal level at times, such as papping MPs on their holidays and delving into their parentage.

I agree with that. No organisation, whether business or political party, should consider themselves exempt from scrutiny or from investigative journalism. The press is there to expose wrongdoing and hold people to account. They have done it with many organisations, not just Reform, and it's to be applauded.

And it isn't their fault when the likes of Reform start whining when they get caught out!

All parties have their antics covered.

Only one party had their undercover footage broadcasted, at least twice. But you have already said that their racism and sexism and financial dealings doesn't worry you. So all is good.

Like sunak helping his father in laws business? Boris lazy never ran a business, Truss...say no more.
He's doing a fair job so far

You're worried about racism and sexism? I believe we all are. Throw in a bit of misogyny and Labour never putting forward a female leader and Bob's your uncle.

I’m sure there are reporters under cover in all parties - why wouldn’t there be? Just only one has so many people with such repellent views while pretending to be in favour of protecting women and children and supporting the common man.

Labour does have the most women in government and had the first female Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Is it that the Greens are losing voters to the Labour party that worries you? Because the Greens aren't doing that well in the polls.

It will be harder for journalists to be undercover in those parties who do due diligence and have decent vetting in place.

Best leave MNHQ to adjudicate in such cases, then.

Although one would imagine due weighting will be given to how the poster feels and how they communicate those feelings i.e. if they feel hounded and requests to stop are ignored etc.

Just my opinion, you understand.

You’re stuck on repeat @placemats!

Glitch in the system @Electra10E

Waves 👋.

Thinks: have they nothing better to do with their time?

I have to say, *LuckyHazelFox, *
your user name is sadly very appropriate for this thread.

I thought this kind of hunting was banned.

Well exactly, they're all much of a muchness.

Oh and now this one too. People have interests, mine include leftwing politics. Ergo, I’m on threads addressing this - either following or posting. It’s not allabpit you @LuckyHazelFox

Challenging a poster's views is not "hunting" them.

It certainly isn’t. It’s called a discussion forum, where posters challenge each other’s views and have a debate.