PM Andy Burham: what next for women's (and children's) rights?

[BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp]

There didn't seem to be an appropriate existing thread, so -
Given that none of us voted for Andy (I know, I know, Labour won the last election, vote for party, he is new leader...blah blah) -

Any predictions for how bad it could get (puberty blocker trial, Conversion Bill, etc.)? Anything positive to look forward to?

New backing from MPs mathematically guarantees Burnham's coronation

27 more Labour MPs have nominated Andy Burnham to be leader of the Labour Party - making it mathematically impossible for any other leadership contender to challenge him.
^^
349 Labour MPs have now nominated Burnham, up from 322 on Thursday.
A candidate needs 81 nominations to stand - so there now aren't enough Labour MPs left to nominate anyone else.
^^
Burnham will still need the backing of three affiliated organisations and trade unions.

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-burnham-starmer-labour-tories-badenoch-farage-12593360#12052134

A Gareth Robert’s article that posits Burnham & his political theory is out of date for modern times:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2026/07/21/andy-burnham-is-stuck-in-the-1990s/

It takes blinkers of a most peculiar kind to look at Britain in 2026 – benefits bill bringing us to the verge of bankruptcy; mass immigration, both legal and illegal, destroying the social framework of centuries; staggering rates of taxation choking any hope of economic recovery – and conclude that the problem is Margaret Thatcher. But she remains the indivisible, indigestible block in the guts of the ageing British progressive.

They can’t let Maggie go. Things are bad? It must be because of Thatcher, not the subsequent 36 years of progressive rule. In fact, in what passes for Burnham’s mind, the problem must be that her successors were not progressive enough. So he has to correct that.

This is quite frighteningly infantile when you stop to think about it. Burnham is running an ancient mental model that simply cannot be updated by new facts – Windows 3.0 in the age of Windows 11. I told you he is stranger than he seems. His amiable envelope disguises this madness. He may be strikingly inane in his tone, but he is strikingly insane in his thinking.

He has kept details of his actual plans very vague. What do we know? Apparently, he intends to take the political fight to Reform UK head on – with policies such as increasing immigration by admitting the Boriswave at terrifying cost, genuflecting to Hamas and immiserating the final remaining pockets of wealth that are keeping the entire show just barely on the road. He seems to desire the return of British Leyland, which will somehow empower the working class.

And this wonky Weltanschauung is why he cannot succeed. His in-tray is heavy with 2026 problems, and he has a 1990 mind (maybe even a 1978 mind). The first horrible exogenous atrocity of his premiership – and there will be many, things being as they are – will confront him with contemporary reality, but he will be unable to process it.

@UtopiaPlanitia
Thanks for posting this. I could have written that word for word, barring the thinly-veiled Thatcher worship and weird 1980s musical references. But, everything else in that op-ed is what we have been saying here, and what a lot of people I know personally are saying. He doesn't have it in him, he's not dealing with reality, and he's already avoiding talking to journalists who have difficult questions to ask. He'll stay at Number 10 having a good time, until he's not anymore, then he'll either leave or be booted out by Reform. Then we'll really be in the pits.

Where are the grownups?

Thank you, that was a treat. I love Gareth Roberts.

He is a very weak flavour of a man, which makes his elevation to saviour by Labour MPs all the more depressingly baffling. It’s like being tied up awaiting a terrible fate when the door bursts open and you cry, ‘Thank heavens, it’s Superman!’, when in fact it’s the bassist from the Inspiral Carpets.

Eresh, I’m delighted to be providing you with a second Robert’s article then 😊:

archive.today/q7oN0

Progressives like Andy and his (retained) Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy regularly accuse their detractors of being the victims of online misinformation. The thinking goes that if only the poor, benighted impressionable souls knew the truth about how wonderful Labour are, they’d be brimming over with glee and gratitude. Large sections of the public, they claim, are being misled by wicked villains like Elon Musk stirring up ‘divisive’ lies about ‘our communities’.

But I have a horrible feeling that it may be the other way around. That it is progressives who are horribly misinformed, and by each other.

A rare insight into this syndrome was the recent appearance of Alastair Campbell on the Triggernometry podcast….

….the interview turned out to be worth my time because it exposed something quite shocking, that perhaps helps to explain the comical inappropriateness of Burnham’s prescriptions for sick Britain.

At one point, it turns out that Campbell has simply never heard of the police’s barmy Race Action Plan. He cannot accept that it is a key, current document from the College of Policing. His mind freezes and he cackles sceptically. He cannot register or retain the information. He seriously seems to assume it’s something the hosts have made up, or are exaggerating. This happens a lot in the interview, about nearly everything they discuss. Campbell, it turns out, is laughably uninformed.

… We hear a lot today about how people live in political echo chambers. But it is better to live with echoes of reality than echoes of fantasy.

…Progressives like Campbell, the BBC and Burnham have hornswoggled themselves, pulled the wool over their own eyes. It is they who are the misinformed.

This matters, because it means that Burnham cannot hope to succeed. His world view is almost comically out of true. Yes, this self-delusion is funny. But it is also terrifying.

Fantastic!

Margaret Thatcher was responsible for right to buy and refusing to let councils build - which has been a disaster. The revenue from North Sea oil went on tax cuts. She sold off water and other utilities to make more tax cuts - tell anyone dealing with Thames Water or any of the water companies pumping out sewage that was a good idea.

Yes Burnham is ill-informed, but not on the damage caused by Thatcher.

And post Thatcher we've had another 21 years of tory government giving us Brexit, PPE scandals and a few other mistakes I'll remember when I've had my second cup of coffee.

That’s a lot of faith in Labour there if you think only they can avoid issues. Let’s see if Andy Burnham delivers what is expected.

@EasternStandard Burnham will only be able to do what his party will let him do - and at least half of it lives in a fantasy world. Whether he can lead them into a better place is something we'll all have to find out. At the moment I see him as the least worst political option as the Tories have imploded, Farage will do the country more damage by pandering to his mates and the greens are insane. None of that changes that Thatcher and her pals could have invested in this country - and asset stripped it instead.

Wishing Burnham the best, but three years is not much time to do what needs to be done. His re-election prospects look tough.

Amongst other issues if he is wise he will kill conversion therapy and puberty blockers. Because if he goes into the 2029 election with those as "achievements" he will leave an open goal for the right.

Meanwhile The Greens are going portray him as a trans genocide enabler whatever he does which will leak votes another way.

I find his Thatcher messaging too backwards looking, I don’t mind the actual aims associated with why he invokes her name but we having big tech changes coming and that’s very far from pre Thatcher.

Where he can achieve what he wants with those specific aims we’ll see.

On who else, I’m happy to give Burnham three years until a GE but then I think Kemi is strong. She’d be great, her party might be lagging so it’s a tough job to get ahead but maybe she can.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it," Kemi suffers because her party will not admit to past mistakes. No-one trusts them not to repeat mistakes.

increasing immigration by admitting the Boriswave at terrifying cost, genuflecting to Hamas and immiserating the final remaining pockets of wealth

Is there evidence that he plans to increase immigration? Though I wouldn’t be surprised if he was more vocal about supporting Palestine and less concerned about rising antisemitism in this country.

Yes she has. And Starmer just suffered from lack of self reflection. The inability to see Labour’s own mistakes was another factor in being ousted.

I agree with this.

Thatcher was first in power nearly 50 years ago. The world has changed so significantly since then, it's ridiculous to focus on rebuilding the 70s.

Looks like he's just clinging to old labour narratives that have no relevance to where we are now.

Whatever Burnham, his new cabinet (my god, Heidi Alexander back and Angela Taylor) and Labour do, they need money.

Where will that money come from? Not corporations as the likes of Alphabet or Amazon play v little tax because of an army of tax and legal specialists. So individuals without those tax breaks, but which ones? The ‘asset rich class’ is primarily the top 1% with legal and tax specialists to organise informal debts, offshore holdings and trust structures to reduce tax payments.

That leaves the 20% (?) of the middle classes who have invested in shares/pensions. So, after years of the govt urging citizens to invest privately, buy shares, grow their own pensions and not depend on the govt in old age, will they now go after that demographic for the money they want. Just what does Burnham think a wealth tax looks like?

Burnham may surprise and I hope so, as god this country is desperate for effective political leadership but I’m not reassured. Why on earth talk about stopping homelessness in his first speech? Reasons for homelessness are complex and varied and saying he’s going to stop it smacks of white knight syndrome. Plus, whilst a concern, it’s not likely to have been the top of the list for financially struggling voters. It was an odd choice.

Edited: there is significant inequality in this country but Burnham needs to be careful not to rely on a simplistic ‘bad’ capitalists vs ‘good’ workers narrative.

Homelessness is too complex to be solved easily, if at all. I agree making that an initial policy was a mistake.

Going after the cost of living is sensible - cuts inflation so cuts the cost of benefit payments, so reduces government borrowing.

hes going to review the policy of letting prisoners out early now that the relatives of PC Harper have spoken up and yes of course his killers shouldnt be let out but women have been speaking up for much longer about men who raped and abused them being let out early and yet its the Harper case that seems to have prompted this review

From Janet Murray's article in the Telegraph (the gift link is at the top of this MN thread link)
Janet Murray is beginning to wonder what was the @#£%&@ point? | Mumsnet

Whether Andy Burnham understands the extent of the problem remains to be seen. Does the new Prime Minister have the guts to challenge Whitehall and other influential institutions still in thrall to gender ideology?

THIS is what I'm waiting to see. Action on this. I'm glad to see that others are also watching him.

ed. Telegraph not Times.

True. But the Harper case was about a male police officer, whereas all those women who were killed were just...women. (typical Labour)

I'm very glad this will be reviewed.

Was just thinking: I bet Bridget wishes now that she had laid the guidance before Parliament earlier. The guidance comes into force on 5 August, and now IF Burnham decides to make any kind of statement about it (he won't), he'll do it while everyone is on holiday or doing something much more interesting than reading the news. So, less public fallout for Andy.

If she'd done it earlier, and set the enforcement date earlier, more people would have noticed! More awkward questions for Andy. Now, by the time he returns from holiday, it will be old news.

Bad move, Bridget. And he screwed you over. Oops.

Reform still ahead in first Sky/YouGov poll since Burnham became PM

Reform UK are still ahead in the first YouGov poll since Andy Burnham took over as prime minister.

The poll for Sky News and The Times has Reform first on 23% (no change from the previous poll), with Labour second on 21% (+1).
The poll was conducted from 23-24 July.

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-andy-burnham-keir-starmer-labour-12593360

Politics latest: 'Best day of my life,' says Andy Burnham as he opens new No 10 North | Politics News | Sky News

'Best day of my life,' says Burnham as he opens new No 10 North
Andy Burnham has just given a speech to staff at the new Number 10 North office, saying: "I cannot tell you what a proud moment this is. I think this might be the best day of my life."

Well, that says a lot: not the day he met his wife, or the day he married her, or the births of his children. No. The opening of the Number 10 North office.

Careless, unthinking man, carelessly reading a stupid line that a useless speechwriter wrote? Wishing halfway through that he had changed that line?

Or does he not think about his wife AT ALL?

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-andy-burnham-keir-starmer-labour-12593360?postid=12138539#liveblog-body

Bridget Phillipson appointed Labour Party chair

The announcement of Phillipson's appointment said: "A central focus of Bridget's role will be ensuring the Labour Party is prepared to fight and win the next general election, which must take place by 2029.
^^
"This includes modernising the party for a new digital campaigning environment and ensuring Labour has the organisation, talent, infrastructure and policy platform needed to secure a second term in government.
^^
"Bridget will also work to strengthen engagement with Labour members, affiliated trade unions and local parties across the country." [my bold]

------

This will be an interesting test for Bridget!

Either Bridget is a committed activist, and therefore will need to temper her activism, in order to get Labour to the point where they sound reasonable, measured, competent, and able to defeat Reform

or

Bridget isn't a committed activist, and yet now has to try to work with the committed activists in all the affiliated unions, in order to get Labour to the point where they sound reasonable, measured, competent, and able to defeat Reform

Rock and a hard place? Very clever, Andy. Looks like he's setting Bridget up to take the fall.

Just copying this across from the Conversion Bill thread

Thanks to @fanOfBen

Free Speech Union is running a petition to try to get the Conversion Practices Bill stopped Apparently Burnham is thought to be going ahead with it - but he has plenty on his plate and maybe it wouldn't take much obvious opposition to get him to give up on it.

Stick fsu conversion practices petition into a search engine and it should come up: headline is Stop the Conversion Therapy Ban. [my bold]

Just copying over for traffic:

Unions boycotting Labour Women's Conference

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5560214-sexist-unions-boycott-labour-womens-conference

thanks @fromorbit