Big pronouncements

for those worrying about the cost to government, don't forget that when the £45 is spent it will attract tax in one way or another at a higher rate than 5%. So the government will recoup some of it.

Darren Jones has come out and said that the voluntary digital ID scheme had not been fully costed and that there had been no money allocated to pay for it.

Which indeed he has today now that he's lost his job but that's somewhat different to what he said here.

In November 2025, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimated the cost of digital ID at £1.8 billion between 2026/27 and 2028/29, and highlighted that no funding had been identified for the programme. No. 10 rejected this estimate, and stated that the costs of the programme up to 2028/29 would be met from within existing budgets. The Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister [Darren Jones] argued that it was realistic to meet these costs from existing budgets because “at the moment we are just spending money on staff support, producing and running the consultation, drafting the legislation and bringing the Bill to the House.” He added that the government would need to get further authority for spending “at the point at which we start building the technology”. The Chief Secretary also disputed the OBR’s estimated costs for the programme of £1.8 billion, but in stating that the government does not yet have its own estimate of costs for the programme, he left open the possibility that the costs will be greater than £1.8 billion.

committees.parliament.uk/publications/53099/documents/297132/default/

As a rather starry eyed teenager back in the 1960s, I remember going on soup runs in London in the middle of the night. So seems to me still that mental health of the UK has been neglected with priority being given to physical health. Maybe the new brooms can look at that?

Man a chance! Not manager.

I am disappointed at the reaction of some on here regarding the removal of VAT from electricity bills. It may only be approx £45 a year but to a family on the breadline, struggling to afford their electricity bills, that is a significant amount. It shows the directions he is moving. I am not an Andy Burnham fan but give the manager chance!

ronib

If average households save £45 annually, it’s peanuts in the scheme of things.
Also the Uk has always had rough sleepers and the numbers are not huge thankfully. To make rough sleeping the signature tune for this new government, doesn’t inspire confidence. I’d be more impressed with a full on approach to getting the economy up and running - but maybe that’s for this afternoon?

Yes, maybe.

Let's face it, there's no shortage of possible signature tunes after the discordance of 14 years of the Tories. The country is in a huge mess, and whoever is in charge has to start somewhere.

Homelessness has long been a 'cause' of mine. I remember being about 25 and going back to my home city after some time away (this would be in the mid eighties) and being shocked to see people on the streets - something I had never seen before. Of course it has got a lot worse since then. I immediately set up a DD to Shelter, and have supported homelessness charities ever since. The thought of not knowing where you are going to sleep at night is terrifying, not least as it shows that you have nobody in your life who is willing to give you a bed.

A determination to do something about this does inspire confidence in me. The UK didn't used to be like this, and it shouldn't be like this now.

I doubt the economy has escaped Burnham's notice. I'm sure he has it in his sights too, but as I say, he has a lot to put right, so mentioning one thing doesn't equate to ignoring everything else.

Galaxy

It us just as easy to manipulate those who read the guardian and who vote Labour. Perhaps more so.

Whilst of course anyone can be manipulated, some are more likely to be than others and in greater numbers. But I accept this is just opinion mostly. But it’s a matter of fact the degree of distortion of facts in some parts of the media which know exactly which buttons to press.

Sorry too many ofs!

Well i agree with that. And no one should assume I am fully against him because I am critical of for example of broad brush announcements.

And no one should assume from my posts that I fully support AB.

I present I feel entirely neutral, but I am trying to understand his announcements and what he is trying to achieve.

It us just as easy to manipulate those who read the guardian and who vote Labour. Perhaps more so.

Galaxy

On here during Johnson tenure there was a daily post about the wrongs of the government, I am not criticising that poster in the slightest ( I think it might have been WW, I cant remember) but the labour government need to be able to cope with the same scrutiny and criticism. If people are discontent thus is due to the failings of governments and institutions not due to the failings of the people.

Of course they need to cope with if but the die are loaded more against them and so the task is harder. There are different types of criticism but outright misinterpretation and misinformation is hard to fight. It’s easy to manipulate and foster discontents

Galaxy

On here during Johnson tenure there was a daily post about the wrongs of the government, I am not criticising that poster in the slightest ( I think it might have been WW, I cant remember) but the labour government need to be able to cope with the same scrutiny and criticism. If people are discontent thus is due to the failings of governments and institutions not due to the failings of the people.

Of course - but that is not what I am arguing about.

Criticism is healthy.

But what I am suggesting is that Burnham - in his first couple of announcements is not addressing the political/economics nerds - he is addressing those folk he met day in day out on the streets of Manchester etc.

They are interested not in the minutiae, but are interested in there being some hope and improvement from the daily grind of trying to meet the bills, feed the children etc.

Headlines like Burnham has just put out are positive, he now has the Herculean task of meeting those needs.

But his intention has been achieved.

Luckygirl3 sounds a bit like me... I'd prefer our politicians to tell it as it is.
😕

I suppose I'm just fearing the worst WWM and others.

I can't bear the glib announcements.
Yes, street sleeping did go down in Manchester but it's up again now.
Yes, Norway is doing well with a completely different system .

We all want improvements - and I want Burnham to succeed - but why oh why can't so many (most?) ordinary people see that everything is nuanced and complicated???
.... it drives me bonkers.

On here during Johnson tenure there was a daily post about the wrongs of the government, I am not criticising that poster in the slightest ( I think it might have been WW, I cant remember) but the labour government need to be able to cope with the same scrutiny and criticism. If people are discontent thus is due to the failings of governments and institutions not due to the failings of the people.

GrannyGravy13

Tuliptree

The problem is GG that whilst I agree the country could well do without that , the majority of the media ( of all types) will be pulling every last thing apart generally based on deliberate misinformation and misinterpretation.

If the government’s policy announcements are fully thought out and bullet proof then there will be nothing to pull apart.

It is the job of the media and political commentators to hold any government to account.

Of course they’ll be pulled apart regardless. And deliberately using misinterpretation and misinformation is nit holding the government to account at all. Just compare how the FT will report/comment on a policy compared with the DM

Whitewavemark2

I understand the minutiae of the arguments being put forward, but I think to a degree we are missing the point here.

The people Burnham is addressing are those folk whose interest in the nitty gritty of the economy and politics is virtually nil, but they are interested in headlines like VAT reduced to zero on electricity bills and ending rough sleeping.

What Burnham has to do now is ensure that these people’s lives are actually improved.

That will be an uphill struggle

Absolutely.

He needs to try to get people to see his initiatives as positive, instead of writing them off as 'flip flops', 'two tier' or the soundbite de jour. That is where the uphill struggle will be - too many people have bought into a cycle of negativity.

If Burnham can turn that round he will be in with a chance. He needs time and space to let his policies take root, or we'll find ourselves back where we were - discontent, constant sniping and maybe yet another PM. It might not be subtle at first, but you can't fight blatant propaganda with subtlety.

Tuliptree

The problem is GG that whilst I agree the country could well do without that , the majority of the media ( of all types) will be pulling every last thing apart generally based on deliberate misinformation and misinterpretation.

If the government’s policy announcements are fully thought out and bullet proof then there will be nothing to pull apart.

It is the job of the media and political commentators to hold any government to account.

This morning I put on R4 for the first time in months and months.

Nick Robinson was “interviewing” the new chancellor.

I quickly remembered why I have stopped listening.

Edward Stourton - Robinson is not.

If average households save £45 annually, it’s peanuts in the scheme of things.
Also the Uk has always had rough sleepers and the numbers are not huge thankfully. To make rough sleeping the signature tune for this new government, doesn’t inspire confidence. I’d be more impressed with a full on approach to getting the economy up and running - but maybe that’s for this afternoon?

I agree FGT that different size populations and different population densities need to be considered in evaluating the usefulness of policy initiatives in other countries, it doesn’t actually mean that they would not be helpful in formulating possible solutions here.

I think it is a good first target but I am worried about announcements that are going to be easily shown not to be true. I didnt for example believe for one moment believe starmer was going to halve violence against women and girls.

Finland was the first but the policy now applies virtually throughout Scandinavia.

I think the character of urban conglomerations is pretty much the same for us as for Scandi and they have made it work.

But I think the key difference is that when they get people off the street and into the flats they have the support services (health, mental health, addiction) to back it up and we do not. Which brings me back to the idea that this is where the government needs to start. Some rough sleepers have just fallen on hard times but most are addicts or mentally ill.

NotSpaghetti

I think it was Finland, rather than Norway, Whitewavemark - re housing schemes

Probably both then, as I’ve just come back from Norway and learned this after a conversation with a Norwegian journalist.