Andy Burnham won Makerfield

They’ve been trying to dig the dirt on Burnham for months already, seeing this coming.

He’s been a highly popular and successful Mayor for nine years, and was an MP/minister for 16 years before that, so he isn’t inexperienced, he has an impressive track record in fact.

I’m not his greatest fan as a result of the way he’s behaved to achieve his PM ambition, but I wouldn’t underestimate him - and I doubt his adversaries are doing.

How long now before the ‘media’ find something about AB to pick on? That will be the reality and is the great danger in changing prime minister.

AB’s victory is impressive but should be tempered by the fact that the other parties sat on their hands.

I think the British public has to decide if they want a rabble rouser/crowd pleaser/joker as PM or a serious politician for what are serious times. I don't remember many of the PMs in my younger years worrying about charisma etc. They got on with the job, not always to my liking, but that's political life. KS has spent his whole working life measuring every word and doesn't go in for the TV type Court room dramas. I suspect, if he is ousted, he will re-emerge in a high profile role in the international arena.

Maggiemaybe

Sadly yes, charisma takes leaders a long way these days. John Major suffered the same attacks because he was seen as boring, but social media wasn’t all powerful then.

It scares me how much influence it has now, particularly when we know it in turn is influenced by foreign disrupters.

What I should have said was, we didn’t have all powerful social media then. The first I remember using was Friends Reunited (around the turn of the century?). Ah, those innocent days!

Mollygo

Referring to the post from Maggiemaybe including the quote from Doodledog
Probably KS’s best demonstration of his ability, was his meeting with DT. So Foreign Secretary would sound like a good choice.

The opportunities for attack by the media against a new PM will hopefully not include any of the errors made by KS. Though we have seen a frenzy whipped up even over a pair of glasses, so who knows.
The hasty limitations of declarations like the Waspi issue mentioned above may mean he thinks before he speaks.
Whatever happens, Maggiemaybe’s last paragraph, be absolutely true.

^Whatever the rights and wrongs of this particular cause, it does illustrate that should he succeed in his ambition to be top dog, Burnham would be under exactly the same restraints that have shackled Starmer.^

Absolutely spot on!

CatsWhiskas

I agree with you, spabbygirl. I quite like Starmer, but he's been briefed against from the very start and, as you say, he doesn't have the charisma to fight the opposition. I can't imagine that Thatcher or Blair in their early years would have put up with half of what Starmer has.

The Labour government's PR has been appalling. They have actually achieved a whole list of changes. Obviously some people won't like those changes, but they have actually achieved some of the things they promised to do and which people voted for.

Starmer lacks charisma and I think he should have ditched Rachel Reeves months ago. Some of the ministers are, in my opinion, strange choices.

👏👏👏👏👏 Not so fussed about Charisma, Blair and Johnston had it in spades 🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️

But why oh why he’s kept RR in post I’ll never know, the whole Mandelson appointment was ill thought out and disastrous and there are one of two other suspect appointments.

I’ve given up second guessing any MP and PM now and just waiting to see what happens now.

All of our political parties appear to be a shitstorm during the few decades, hey cannot even behave like grown adults half the time!

Sadly yes, charisma takes leaders a long way these days. John Major suffered the same attacks because he was seen as boring, but social media wasn’t all powerful then.

It scares me how much influence it has now, particularly when we know it in turn is influenced by foreign disrupters.

GemmaMack

The triple lock should definitely go

I don’t agree but I do think this could be considered if the personal allowance was raised and possibly a lower tax rate for first £15,000 of taxed income.

I don't think people voted for specific changes, they voted against the Tories, that is a very different thing.

I agree with you, spabbygirl. I quite like Starmer, but he's been briefed against from the very start and, as you say, he doesn't have the charisma to fight the opposition. I can't imagine that Thatcher or Blair in their early years would have put up with half of what Starmer has.

The Labour government's PR has been appalling. They have actually achieved a whole list of changes. Obviously some people won't like those changes, but they have actually achieved some of the things they promised to do and which people voted for.

Starmer lacks charisma and I think he should have ditched Rachel Reeves months ago. Some of the ministers are, in my opinion, strange choices.

Starmer is NOT going to stand down that would be out of character. However if there is a vote of no confidence he will go without fuss.

Let's be very clear Burnham wants the top job, there was no point in him giving up Manchester just to be an also ran minister. If Labour MPs want Burnham as leader they will unite behind him and there will be no contest for leadership.

GrannyGravy13

The country voted for change, Labour are turning out to be carbon copies of the Conservatives.

I am annoyed, disappointed and frustrated in equal measures.

I absolutely agree, people were desperate for a change from the Tories and Starmer just gave them more austerity.

I see why because it stops headlines in a few years time that Labour won the election and immediately started spending but it has backfired on him.

I actually like Starmer & think he has done a good job. He's solid & reliable & doesn't have his hand in the till but he just doesn't have the charisma that Burnham does.

GrannyGravy13

The country voted for change, Labour are turning out to be carbon copies of the Conservatives.

I am annoyed, disappointed and frustrated in equal measures.

I totally agree!

Referring to the post from Maggiemaybe including the quote from Doodledog
Probably KS’s best demonstration of his ability, was his meeting with DT. So Foreign Secretary would sound like a good choice.

The opportunities for attack by the media against a new PM will hopefully not include any of the errors made by KS. Though we have seen a frenzy whipped up even over a pair of glasses, so who knows.
The hasty limitations of declarations like the Waspi issue mentioned above may mean he thinks before he speaks.
Whatever happens, Maggiemaybe’s last paragraph, be absolutely true.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this particular cause, it does illustrate that should he succeed in his ambition to be top dog, Burnham would be under exactly the same restraints that have shackled Starmer.

I'd hoped Starmer was a 'go for it' person with plenty of omph but Burnham - hopefully - will be better. We shall see!

Doodledog

Well, I’m sad it’s clear me to this, but given that it did, I’m pleased with the result. I think Starmer is a decent man who has been vilified by the media in all their forms from day 1. He didn’t handle comms well, whereas Burnham will. It says a lot about the population that media hostility has affected things so much, particularly given that Starmer said at the start that there would be no quick fixes after 14 years of Tory mismanagement, but that’s the world we’re living in.

I wish Burnham well, and also hope that Starmer is given a role he feels he can accept. I would like to see him as Foreign Secretary, but David Milliband is being mooted for that, it seems. If he can ‘do a Cameron’ and get into the HoL he could be made a Secretary of State. Time will tell, I suppose.

I agree, though I expect the mainstream and social media guns will be aimed at any new PM too just as soon as the honeymoon period is over and it becomes apparent to the public that no leader can please everyone.

Andy Burnham has already shown this by publicly supporting the WASPI women during the hustings.

I have long supported the campaign. And I feel uncomfortable when politicians were all holding up that sort of banner and then it got into government and didn’t do anything. So I stick by the campaigns that I support. I stuck by the Hillsborough families. I’ll stick by the Waspi women because they deserve some recompense for the unfairness.

This was hastily followed by a statement from his team clarifying that this didn’t mean he would pay the compensation the Ombudsman says should be paid, and that he considered the compensation case closed. There was a hint that there might just be earlier access to a free bus pass. An empty gesture as most WASPIs are now of an age to have these anyway.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this particular cause, it does illustrate that should he succeed in his ambition to be top dog, Burnham would be under exactly the same restraints that have shackled Starmer.

Sarnia I also think you’ll find Adult and Children social care, by a large margin, take up a huge percentage of council budgets.

I’m not disagreeing with you that we need much better and available SEND provision, countrywide, for all children.

Let the games begin. 🤗

LemonJam

Starmer is a lawyer and has long career experience calculating evidence and likelihood of conviction success and planning his defence accordingly.

The emphatic vote share Burnham won ( more than all the other parties put together) will weigh on him over the weekend. He knows what's coming. He likely will realise in that context of Andy's vote share, his likelihood of success in winning a leadership contest is low and doesn't match the CPS 51% threshold to prosecute an argument. Thats how his mid will work. We've yet to see how his emotions play out and whEther they overtake reality.

I hope his desire to serve (as F SEC by negotiation) overcomes his determination to hold onto PM role and avoid a leadership contest. We will know after the weekend.

🙏🙏🙏🤞🤞🤞

Sarnia

Cossy
It isn't a case of magicking up money, as you put it. SEND children who attend private specialist schools but have parents who cannot afford the fees have to fight and I do mean fight, their local education authority for them to name the appropriate school and by doing so pick up the bill for the fees. Many County Councils are on the brink financially due to having to pay SEND fees which are increasing at an alarming rate. Bankruptcy is very near for some of them. I firmly believe that every mainstream school should have specialist teachers and resources in place so that, no matter what a child's needs are, so they can access an education at their local school. Sadly neither the Tories or Labour have thought this a sensible step. So, in the meantime, SEND children with moderate to severe issues battle for specialist private school places with many parents struggling to find fee increases.

Think you’re completing missing the point.

6% of school age children attend independent schools, of that 6% approx 1 quarter are children with SEND. But that does include those children that are not in mainstream independent schools, but SEND private schools.

My point is that great SEND educations should be available to to all children who need it.

So I’m guessing we are in agreement there.

In our local area we have at least three state SEND schools, and a good few state primaries with good SEND provision and nurture hubs.

One of the issues, as I see it, is SEND covers such a huge area of children from the physically disabled, mentally disabled, autistic, learning disabilities (etc) and then within those areas children have such a wide range of needs, for example child A may have mobility disabilities but no issues in other areas, and child B may have similar mobility disabilities and severe learning disabilities. I agree it’s a minefield.

I agree that parents and children deserve not have to fight for a specialised school place, I just don’t believe that privately funded provision (wherever the funding comes from) should be available for a small percentage of SEND children and not the vast majority.

I believe that good state provision for all SEND children should be available.

In that scenario I wonder what Streeting would do? If the PM resigns, constitutionally there has to be a contest, but he could jeopardise his own future chances if he stands against Burnham, knowing he can’t win. All very interesting - it could be a painless transition in the end.

Starmer is a lawyer and has long career experience calculating evidence and likelihood of conviction success and planning his defence accordingly.

The emphatic vote share Burnham won ( more than all the other parties put together) will weigh on him over the weekend. He knows what's coming. He likely will realise in that context of Andy's vote share, his likelihood of success in winning a leadership contest is low and doesn't match the CPS 51% threshold to prosecute an argument. Thats how his mid will work. We've yet to see how his emotions play out and whEther they overtake reality.

I hope his desire to serve (as F SEC by negotiation) overcomes his determination to hold onto PM role and avoid a leadership contest. We will know after the weekend.

Cossy
It isn't a case of magicking up money, as you put it. SEND children who attend private specialist schools but have parents who cannot afford the fees have to fight and I do mean fight, their local education authority for them to name the appropriate school and by doing so pick up the bill for the fees. Many County Councils are on the brink financially due to having to pay SEND fees which are increasing at an alarming rate. Bankruptcy is very near for some of them. I firmly believe that every mainstream school should have specialist teachers and resources in place so that, no matter what a child's needs are, so they can access an education at their local school. Sadly neither the Tories or Labour have thought this a sensible step. So, in the meantime, SEND children with moderate to severe issues battle for specialist private school places with many parents struggling to find fee increases.

Agree Wyllow3- Starmer would be well placed as Foreign Secretary to continue alliance relationships he has nurtured. He says country comes before personal ambition- he could serve the country well still in that role.

I am not sure that Starmer will give up the fight that easily. But I may be misjudging him.