Burnham

[briantrumpet]

Why don't they just join the tories or reform?

Glasman is the weirdest one. He'd sit extremely happily in Reform, but seems to have a pervy connection to 'his' working class (not that he's working class, obvs.) But Mahmood too - she's in the mould of Patel and Braverman, female from immigrant background, wanting to pull up the drawbridge and make current immigrants the subject of a hostile state.

 

[Pross]

This has no basis in anything other than one person's guess. But I guess I know about 2/3 of the names, which is a start. I like the number of red-haired female Home Secretaries suggested.

https://bsky.app/profile/jamesdaustin.bsky.social/post/3moxtdxbajk2n

View attachment 15934

I'm half expecting to see Nick Thomas-Symonds get a promotion. He's currently Paymaster General but seems to have been doing a fair bit of the media stuff lately.

 

[briantrumpet]

From Sam Freedman

 

[AuroraSaab]

More powers for Mayors? Burnham got 65% of the mayoral election vote on a turn out of less than 35% as I recall. I don't think the turn out is much higher in other UK mayor elections. It's a lot of power for people hardly anybody voted for.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

From Sam Freedman

View attachment 15974

I am going to err on the side of reckless abandon and say I think Burnham is going to be far more direct in his policy and decision making (but I also thought Starmer would be so what do I know 😂). I don't see the point of him going through all this effort and the incoming scrutiny just to offer more of the same. Not saying he is going to be a radical socialist, but I expect him to offer up some more 'leftist' policy.

 

[secretsqirrel]

More powers for Mayors? Burnham got 65% of the mayoral election vote on a turn out of less than 35% as I recall. I don't think the turn out is much higher in other UK mayor elections. It's a lot of power for people hardly anybody voted for.

If people choose not to vote they get the government they deserve.

 

[briantrumpet]

I am going to err on the side of reckless abandon and say I think Burnham is going to be far more direct in his policy and decision making (but I also thought Starmer would be so what do I know 😂). I don't see the point of him going through all this effort and the incoming scrutiny just to offer more of the same. Not saying he is going to be a radical socialist, but I expect him to offer up some more 'leftist' policy.

Time will tell. I think he has more political nous than Starmer (well, that's not hard), and general consensus is that he's good at establishing a 'narrative' and connecting with people. But there's more to running a country than getting nice shiny trams and skyscrapers.

The interesting thing for me will be is if he has an underlying set of principles (no matter how woolly) from which he can argue some sort of consistent and hopeful direction, without everything going through focus groups and polling. I came to the conclusion today that Starmer might genuinely have thought he was kind of 'centrist' as his right wing hostility to immigrants via Mahmood 'balanced out' the socialist things they've done, without realising that that's not how politics work.

 

[briantrumpet]

Without knowing anything about her, I guess that'll go down OK in Manchester, and Mancunians won't mind having one of their own as PM, especially if Burnham does give more voice to not-London.

 

[AuroraSaab]

If people choose not to vote they get the government they deserve.

I think you need to give people something to positively vote for. If all the options are unpalatable voting anyway might give someone a mandate for things you really don't agree with just because it's slightly less worse than the other candidates.

 

[briantrumpet]

I restrained myself from commenting on this post. In what universe does London feel left out of the equation? "His attitude to London needs flushing out", FFS? I mean, it's not as if London's exactly been overlooked for the last few hundred years. While The North and Midlands had the Industrial Revolution, the South West's last time of real economic action was about the 15th Century (and no, I'm not joking).

I must admit that Burnham's suggestion that he might move some of the PM operation to Manchester rather amusing, if only for winding up those who think that the everything needs to happen in London, well, because.

 

[First Aspect]

Has anyone worked out what Starmerism is yet?

We should have a poll.

That's Starmerism.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Well Burnham's angle when he was King of the North was very much that the north was overlooked for London so it will be interesting to see how he squares all that when he isn't advocating for one region alone. Moving things out of London just for the sake of it will likely cost a fortune and achieve not much.

 

[Pross]

I restrained myself from commenting on this post. In what universe does London feel left out of the equation? "His attitude to London needs flushing out", FFS? I mean, it's not as if London's exactly been overlooked for the last few hundred years. While The North and Midlands had the Industrial Revolution, the South West's last time of real economic action was about the 15th Century (and no, I'm not joking).

I must admit that Burnham's suggestion that he might move some of the PM operation to Manchester rather amusing, if only for winding up those who think that the everything needs to happen in London, well, because.

View attachment 15979

Feels like when men complain there’s no men’s rights etc.

 

[secretsqirrel]

I restrained myself from commenting on this post. In what universe does London feel left out of the equation? "His attitude to London needs flushing out", FFS? I mean, it's not as if London's exactly been overlooked for the last few hundred years. While The North and Midlands had the Industrial Revolution, the South West's last time of real economic action was about the 15th Century (and no, I'm not joking).

I must admit that Burnham's suggestion that he might move some of the PM operation to Manchester rather amusing, if only for winding up those who think that the everything needs to happen in London, well, because.

View attachment 15979

It’s all in Burnham’s book Head North. He really is an advocate for devolution, PR, and huge Westminster reform. He also is very aware of the dysfunction that gets in the way like the whipping system. I’ve had a digital copy for a while but only dipped into it randomly, so may have a proper read now he‘s hopped on the train to the south.

 

[briantrumpet]

Well Burnham's angle when he was King of the North was very much that the north was overlooked for London so it will be interesting to see how he squares all that when he isn't advocating for one region alone. Moving things out of London just for the sake of it will likely cost a fortune and achieve not much.

Agree, apart from winding up those who can't imagine there's sentient life outside of London.