The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[brad465]

Mandelson was a very good choice if you wanted someone who could smarm Trump: no one smarms like him. But it was a risk as he just has so much baggage.

Smarmy people by their very nature are full of baggage.

 

[Tetchytyke]

“...Or in one of his glorious homes he likes to share with his friends (yum yum) …”

Mandelson knew exactly what Epstein was up to.

Worth noting that what Epstein thought was "yum yum" isn't really what Mandelson would consider "yum yum"...

Sheds a whole new light on the 'Lord Mandelson of Rio' jibe from 1998

Not really, Punch- owned by none other than Mohamed al Fayed- was just being homophobic.

Ironic really that William Hague was the one casting the biggest slurs, given what he was getting up to with his young male aide.

A lot of politicians act as if they are immune from things that affect “normal people”, sad to say. I think once they get in a position of determining legislation they think they’re better than us.

Westminster is a bubble and I think a lot of people inside of it get very much caught up in it. I don't think it is arrogance exactly, but Westminster is suffocating (you're effectively in a gated compound where you eat, drink, socialise and even sleep) and I can imagine it is very easy to lose a sense of reality.

I have a few close friends who were inside it, either on the political side as aides or on the staffer side. Going drinking with them in the Palace of Westminster was always eye-opening, especially Strangers Bar and the Sports and Social Club. The latter especially was always a great place to people-watch (and it had an exceptional list of real ales).

There's a lot of truth in the old cliche that politics is light entertainment for ugly people.

Lots of people, none of whom were in the cool gang at school or university, stuck in a gated compound and suddenly discovering sex and alcohol. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Gloster]

One thing that can be said is that Starmer has acted fairly promptly, rather than letting it drag on for ages until a tawdry conclusion. The Mail has only just started screaming and he’s gone: let us just hope that this doesn’t foreshadow government by the editor of the Mail.

 

[DarloRich]

given what he was getting up to with his young male aide.

that is outrageous! they merely shared a twin room to make best use of taxpayers money!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Sep 2025 ==

Lots of people, none of whom were in the cool gang at school or university, stuck in a gated compound and suddenly discovering sex and alcohol. What could possibly go wrong?

sounds good - where do i sign ? I wasn't even in a gang cool or otherwise at uni. Mainly because I hate students.

 

[styles]

Westminster is a bubble and I think a lot of people inside of it get very much caught up in it. I don't think it is arrogance exactly, but Westminster is suffocating (you're effectively in a gated compound where you eat, drink, socialise and even sleep) and I can imagine it is very easy to lose a sense of reality.

I have a few close friends who were inside it, either on the political side as aides or on the staffer side. Going drinking with them in the Palace of Westminster was always eye-opening, especially Strangers Bar and the Sports and Social Club. The latter especially was always a great place to people-watch (and it had an exceptional list of real ales).

Famously why Mhairi Black decided not to stand for election again after her 5 years in Parliament. I know two MPs, both female, and they both complain about the toxicity of it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Sep 2025 ==

In the current overall circumstances that the world is in, boring is undoubtedly good.
Whilst most definitely not a supporter of the Conservative party, the suggestion of William Hague is a good one. The right mixture of gravitas and, as you say, light-hearted humour; plus he has experience of diplomacy as a former Foreign Secretary.

Ambassadors are different to politicians at the same time though.

Kier Starmer got elected on a ticket of being boring after years of Conservative party chaos, but it's not a long-term strategy frankly. Most front benchers do actually need a personality. Whether Phillipson has one good enough to bat back jibes from the shadow front bench remains to be seen I suppose.

 

[Richard Scott]

Kier Starmer got elected on a ticket of being boring after years of Conservative party chaos, but it's not a long-term strategy frankly. Most front benchers do actually need a personality. Whether Phillipson has one good enough to bat back jibes from the shadow front bench remains to be seen I suppose.

They also need a vision but this seems sadly lacking in almost all politicians recently. Unfortunately, the only ones that seem to have a vision are Reform, partially why they're still gaining ground?

 

[styles]

They also need a vision but this seems sadly lacking in almost all politicians recently. Unfortunately, the only ones that seem to have a vision are Reform, partially why they're still gaining ground?

All weathercocks, no signposts these days. Well, a signpost in the form of Farage to give him some form of credit, everybody else just swaying whichever way the polls and surveys go.

 

[jfollows]

They also need a vision but this seems sadly lacking in almost all politicians recently. Unfortunately, the only ones that seem to have a vision are Reform, partially why they're still gaining ground?

Agreed, I’ve been going on about this for a while now, but not being the Conservatives was good enough to be elected in 2024, but not having a vision, a message, something different they stand for means they won’t stay elected. I just don’t see that they get this.

 

[J663738]

It is funny, both Starmer and Macron seem to be very good on the international stage, but are rather lacking in managing their own countries. As others have said, I don't really know what Starmer stands for, he seems to be a Zelig figure, happy with both Corbyn and Mandelson, until he's not and then morphs into something else.

 

[muz379]

It is funny, both Starmer and Macron seem to be very good on the international stage, but are rather lacking in managing their own countries. As others have said, I don't really know what Starmer stands for, he seems to be a Zelig figure, happy with both Corbyn and Mandelson, until he's not and then morphs into something else.

I think Starmer would actually be relatively good as a Foreign secretary, or as a president in a system like Irelands where it is largely a ceremonial role.

But as the leader of a government I don't think he is particularly good.

And to be honest the sooner the party reckons with this and finds someone that is good the better.

 

[styles]

I think Starmer would actually be relatively good as a Foreign secretary, or as a president in a system like Irelands where it is largely a ceremonial role.

But as the leader of a government I don't think he is particularly good.

And to be honest the sooner the party reckons with this and finds someone that is good the better.

Indeed. He would also be an excellent director of public prosecutions! Unfortunately our governments suffer the Peter Principle all too well.

 

[Harpo]

Starmer and then Reeves must go as twin authors of the last year's clusterducks.

Labour needs a huge reset after betraying the people it traditionally championed and Rayner's departure to the naughty step for a couple of years will make the choice of Starmer's replacement interesting.

That leaves four years to restore values and trust while ignoring the hollow bellowing from Clacton/Frinton.

 

[oldman]

Labour needs a huge reset after betraying the people it traditionally championed,

Apart from a change in personnel, what would that huge reset look like in terms of policy?

 

[AlterEgo]

Apart from a change in personnel, what would that huge reset look like in terms of policy?

Probably an end to neoliberalism which has dominated British government policy for 40 years.

 

[Richard Scott]

I think Starmer would actually be relatively good as a Foreign secretary, or as a president in a system like Irelands where it is largely a ceremonial role.

But as the leader of a government I don't think he is particularly good.

And to be honest the sooner the party reckons with this and finds someone that is good the better.

The issue is, who is any good. Where's the person with vision and character to take it through? Like I said, apart from Reform it seems distinctly lacking in all politicians at the moment and that's not a good thing.

 

[oldman]

Probably an end to neoliberalism which has dominated British government policy for 40 years.

What are you going to replace it with? What does it mean in terms of actual policy?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I know two MPs, both female, and they both complain about the toxicity of it.

Way off topic, but definitely. My friends are civil servants not politicians but they are both women and both also say it can be a toxic environment. One was a civil servant for several senior politicians.

The recently sacked ambassador was apparently the best one they worked for, always unfailingly polite and appeared to take a genuine interest in his staff and their welfare. Would always notice and compliment their staff’s new shoes/haircut/etc and when travelling would always ensure they were looked after. Silly things like he’d always bring nice biscuits for a train journey.

All qualities that would actually make him a very good ambassador. You can see why he was appointed.

I can’t repeat what they say about some of the others they worked with…

 

[AlterEgo]

What are you going to replace it with? What does it mean in terms of actual policy?

Britain could really do with a high taxation style social democracy. That would put an end to much of the austerity people have come to get used to as a result of the necrotic state of the nation's finances. That is what a party supposedly of the left should be doing.

 

[oldman]

Britain could really do with a high taxation style social democracy. That would put an end to much of the austerity people have come to get used to as a result of the necrotic state of the nation's finances. That is what a party supposedly of the left should be doing.

Would people vote for that? The Tory media have successfully pushed the idea that we are already groaning under an intolerable burden of taxation. In any case Labour was not elected on a high-tax, high-spending policy and can hardly change now. It's a party of the centre-left.

A lot of politics is about muddling through. Slogans like take back control, stop the boats, end neoliberalism (not so catchy) don't help by implying there is a simple solution.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

Would people vote for that? The Tory media have successfully pushed the idea that we are already groaning under an intolerable burden of taxation. In any case Labour was not elected on a high-tax, high-spending policy and can hardly change now. It's a party of the centre-left.

A lot of politics is about muddling through. Slogans like take back control, stop the boats, end neoliberalism (not so catchy) don't help by implying there is a simple solution.

It is true that we are highly taxed, especially when compared to the often-woeful state of public services which we receive for all that tax.

 

[AlterEgo]

Would people vote for that? The Tory media have successfully pushed the idea that we are already groaning under an intolerable burden of taxation. In any case Labour was not elected on a high-tax, high-spending policy and can hardly change now.

You asked me what *I* woukd do differently, now you say the government can't do anything different anyway. I don't understand the point of your enquiry.

It's a party of the centre-left.

No it is not. It is not really left leaning in any coherent way. Just in bits and bobs. It is currently trying to meet Reform on the right on several issues.

 

[Tetchytyke]

What would you know, it was Morgan McSweeney who was Mandelson's biggest supporter.

Access Restricted

Morgan McSweeney, Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, is facing questions over his key role in the appointment of Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US.

Mr McSweeney, who is close to Lord Mandelson, is known to have pushed hard for him to get the job in the face of obvious concerns about his suitability, and is being blamed for the delay in sacking him when his position became untenable this week.

He was said in one report to be the final holdout among Sir Keir’s advisers, insisting Downing Street needed to defend Lord Mandelson when everyone else was insisting he had to go.

One source told Politico: “Everyone was like, this is looking really bad for the Prime Minister and Morgan was like, no, we need to defend him.”

A quick win for Labour would be getting rid of that halfwit. He's not an expert political adviser, he's a liability who simply doesn't seem to grasp that Pub Karaoke Farage isn't going to win the next election.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Sep 2025 ==

ritain could really do with a high taxation style social democracy. That would put an end to much of the austerity people have come to get used to

We've got the highest levels of taxation since World War Two.

The issue isn't that we don't tax people enough, the issue is that we get nothing to show for all the tax that we do pay.

Where does all the money go? What do they do with it? The truth is that too much of it goes into the pockets of the hedge funds behind our privatised companies and too little of it goes into those services. The water companies are obviously the poster children for hedge fund greed and incompetence, but it is rampant across all sectors.

Labour's problem is that they're as much in favour of private sector greed as the Conservatives ever were. Look where Wes Streeting gets his funding from and look who he supports as a result. But they're clever- private sector companies get to stick an NHS logo on the front door and so the privatisation is largely invisible to the naked eye.

You can't get a GP because GP surgeries have been hollowed out by US hedge funds. One company which owns 600 GP surgeries (or at least the buildings those surgeries are based in) has just been bought by a US hedge fund for £1.6bn*; that same hedge fund is a major investor in Thames Water. But Reform are effective because they're saying its because some brown people came here on a dinghy, and people believe them.

* source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-equity-takeover-worth-ps1-61bn-b2730001.html

GP surgeries owner Assura has agreed to be taken over by a US private equity giant in a deal worth £1.61 billion, after becoming the target of a bidding war.

The London-listed company will be bought by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) and Stonepeak Partners.

The investment groups offered 49.4p per Assura share, having increased a number of previous bids to buy the business.

Assura owns more than 600 buildings, including doctors’ surgeries, with a portfolio valued at more than £3.1 billion. It has just 79 members of staff.

You can be sure those assets will be squeezed harder. And when the rent goes up, the money available to pay for GPs goes down...

 

[oldman]

You asked me what *I* woukd do differently, now you say the government can't do anything different anyway. I don't understand the point of your enquiry.

A normal sort of political discussion, I would have thought. I asked what you would want to do to improve things. You suggested 'high taxation style social democracy'. I replied 'would people vote for that?', with an implied answer 'no'. The discussion could continue - you could flesh out your ideological soundbites, but you don't want to, so you say it's pointless. Fair enough.

 

[muz379]

The issue is, who is any good. Where's the person with vision and character to take it through? Like I said, apart from Reform it seems distinctly lacking in all politicians at the moment and that's not a good thing.

Indeed , I dont see anyone in the parliamentary party who would immediately jump out as a good replacement.

Beyond that perhaps either of the big city Mayors Sadiq Khan or Andy Burnham but obviously that would be into the future.

 

[Thirteen]

Indeed , I dont see anyone in the parliamentary party who would immediately jump out as a good replacement.

Beyond that perhaps either of the big city Mayors Sadiq Khan or Andy Burnham but obviously that would be into the future.

I can't imagine Sadiq Khan wanting to go back to mainstream politics after 12 years as Mayor of London. If anything, I expect him to bow out of politics entirely since I don't think he's going to stand for a fourth term.

 

[Purple Train]

What would you know, it was Morgan McSweeney who was Mandelson's biggest supporter.

Access Restricted

A quick win for Labour would be getting rid of that halfwit. He's not an expert political adviser, he's a liability who simply doesn't seem to grasp that Pub Karaoke Farage isn't going to win the next election.

He's as much use to the government as a speed hump on a runway and that's being generous. I really can't think of a single way the work he does benefits the country. But, as he's Reform's biggest asset at the minute, I doubt there will be any sustained calls to move him along.

 

[brad465]

One can only presume McSweeney has a bank of nude photos of Starmer, that he's using as blackmail material to stay in post.

 

[Simon11]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Sep 2025 ==


We've got the highest levels of taxation since World War Two.

The issue isn't that we don't tax people enough, the issue is that we get nothing to show for all the tax that we do pay.

Where does all the money go? What do they do with it? The truth is that too much of it goes into the pockets of the hedge funds behind our privatised companies and too little of it goes into those services. The water companies are obviously the poster children for hedge fund greed and incompetence, but it is rampant across all sectors.

Labour's problem is that they're as much in favour of private sector greed as the Conservatives ever were. Look where Wes Streeting gets his funding from and look who he supports as a result. But they're clever- private sector companies get to stick an NHS logo on the front door and so the privatisation is largely invisible to the naked eye.

You can't get a GP because GP surgeries have been hollowed out by US hedge funds. One company which owns 600 GP surgeries (or at least the buildings those surgeries are based in) has just been bought by a US hedge fund for £1.6bn*; that same hedge fund is a major investor in Thames Water. But Reform are effective because they're saying its because some brown people came here on a dinghy, and people believe them.

* source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-equity-takeover-worth-ps1-61bn-b2730001.html



You can be sure those assets will be squeezed harder. And when the rent goes up, the money available to pay for GPs goes down...

Still looking in really small 'pots' of savings by looking at hedge funds extracting money from water and health sector. And the money 'lost' here is likely to support peoples pensions pots.

There are also parts of our hard earned tax money getting spent on:

-> The annual cost of the State Pension for the UK government is projected to be around £145.6 billion in 2025 to 2026 with triple lock making the situation even worse and no Government willing to peg it down a bit.
-> The UK pays billions in interest on its national debt each year, with forecasts for the debt interest spending in 2025-26 to be £111.2 billion [This could pay for a brand new HS2 line each and every year!]

 

[AlterEgo]

A normal sort of political discussion, I would have thought. I asked what you would want to do to improve things. You suggested 'high taxation style social democracy'. I replied 'would people vote for that?', with an implied answer 'no'. The discussion could continue - you could flesh out your ideological soundbites, but you don't want to, so you say it's pointless. Fair enough.

It's pointless outlining an off topic personal political manifesto on a thread not dedicated to it. It isn't my concern in my fantasy social democracy whether the British people would vote for it or not, people voted for Labour because they are not the Conservatives and wanted to give another set of people a go at managing the country using exactly the same system. That isn't the same as people actively choosing that system because they think it's the best.

 

[J663738]

Unfortunately our governments suffer the Peter Principle all too well.

The (new) Peter Principle: When someone is good at their job, but has a tendency to go off the rails!