The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[Bletchleyite]

One redeeming feature of hospitality is that it redistributes from the older generation, who do lots of the spending, to the younger generation, who do a lot of the employment. Grumpy well off old people should definitely stop whinging about the price of cake and ale, and this has really got me thinking about whether I need to end my lifelong cultural resistance to tipping in cafes and pubs.

With increased card payments these days it's now mostly service charges, and I'm absolutely not tipping on top of a service charge. Really we should legislate to mandate "service compris" as the French did years ago (though that doesn't stop the Parisian scammers...sorry...waiters trying to get a typical US 20% out of tourists).

 

[J663738]

Latest polling for next year's Senedd Elections in Wales has Labour on just 14%
The two top runners are Plaid and Reform.
I don't Labour's polling has ever sunk this low, especially in Wales.

Elections in Wales - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Senex]

With increased card payments these days it's now mostly service charges, and I'm absolutely not tipping on top of a service charge. Really we should legislate to mandate "service compris" as the French did years ago (though that doesn't stop the Parisian scammers...sorry...waiters trying to get a typical US 20% out of tourists).

Why is it that if I go to a book-shop and receive perhaps quite a few minutes of expert advice (or to an ironmonger's and likewise) there's no question of tipping, but if I queue at the counter in a café to order a cup of coffee and that's then brought to me at a seat I am expected to pay a service-charge or a tip? It's never made sense to me. "Service compris" is so much better and so much more civilised — pay the staff properly, and quote a simple final price to the customer. The staff who do a paid job shouldn't be relying on (semi-obligatory) charity to get properly recompensed for their work.

 

[Topological]

Latest polling for next year's Senedd Elections in Wales has Labour on just 14%
The two top runners are Plaid and Reform.
I don't Labour's polling has ever sunk this low, especially in Wales.

Elections in Wales - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The opinion polls will underestimate Labour support. I suspect supporting Labour is almost as bad as saying that you vote Tory in the national opinion polls.

However, the electoral system in Wales will mean that the quiet Labour support going to the polls will not make the result difference that the quiet Conservatives make under FPTP.

Morgan's latest decision not to meet Trump says everything about why we need a change of leadership in Wales.

 

[J663738]

Morgan's latest decision not to meet Trump says everything about why we need a change of leadership in Wales.

BBC Wales ran story and had a HYS open about it, but was closed early due to the amount of negative comments about her.
IMHO, her decision was very petty and says more about her, than it does about Trump.

 

[Topological]

BBC Wales ran story and had a HYS open about it, but was closed early due to the amount of negative comments about her.
IMHO, her decision was very petty and says more about her, than it does about Trump.

Link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly68lerg8vo#comments Content below:

Gareth Lewis
Political editor, BBC Wales News

• • Published
    5 hours ago
  • 296 Comments

Wales' First Minister Eluned Morgan has turned down the King's invitation to a state banquet with Donald Trump at Windsor Castle.
The US President arrived in London on Tuesday night with First Lady Melania Trump for his second state visit.
However, the Welsh government said Morgan wanted to support colleagues at an "incredibly difficult time" after the recent death of Caerphilly Member of the Senedd Hefin David.
But senior Welsh Conservative criticised her absence, saying the "no show" exposed political turmoil in Welsh Labour and a "weakness" for not representing the nation at a major state event.
Welsh government analysis suggests the US is Wales' most valuable trading partner by country, external, though the EU is bigger overall.

I do not know what the BBC expected when having a HYS on this. It is clear no one can defend Morgan.

 

[brad465]

BBC Wales ran story and had a HYS open about it, but was closed early due to the amount of negative comments about her.
IMHO, her decision was very petty and says more about her, than it does about Trump.

Link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly68lerg8vo#comments Content below:

I do not know what the BBC expected when having a HYS on this. It is clear no one can defend Morgan.

The BBC close comments for all sorts of reasons so it's not obvious the reason you both describe is the one. Given most HYS's open late morning, but this one opened early morning, it's possible this was opened by accident and was never intended to be comment able on. Given there is a lot of Royal-related stuff in the article (as a state visit article), and Royal news never gets HYS's attached, that might be the reason. Also if it's a moderator's nightmare, that leads to early closure. I remember there was a HYS on a sperm donor article that had to close early, because, would you believe it, lots of comments were lewd puns that broke their house rule on language used (they really should have seen that coming, oops there's another pun).

For the record, I'm not saying the FM's decision not to go is brilliant, but we should not jump to conclusions about why comments were quickly closed on this article. But the fact we do is no surprise in our post-truth society today.

 

[Topological]

The BBC close comments for all sorts of reasons so it's not obvious the reason you both describe is the one. Given most HYS's open late morning, but this one opened early morning, it's possible this was opened by accident and was never intended to be comment able on. Given there is a lot of Royal-related stuff in the article (as a state visit article), and Royal news never gets HYS's attached, that might be the reason. Also if it's a moderator's nightmare, that leads to early closure. I remember there was a HYS on a sperm donor article that had to close early, because, would you believe it, lots of comments were lewd puns that broke their house rule on language used (they really should have seen that coming, oops there's another pun).

For the record, I'm not saying the FM's decision not to go is brilliant, but we should not jump to conclusions about why comments were quickly closed on this article. But the fact we do is no surprise in our post-truth society today.

I am not sure I described the reason for the closure? I only posted the thread and remarked that the BBC would expect no one to agree with Morgan. That says nothing about closing the HYS. There is one on the 20mph speed limit now.

Since Kier is going to the dinner, and there are no blanket 20mph plans in England, the Welsh situation is quite off topic. That applies no matter how pleasing the latest opinion poll is.

At least the Deputy Leadership contest is focusing a few minds on what Labour should be: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly6gevkn7zo

Labour deputy leadership contender Lucy Powell, who was fired by Sir Keir Starmer in his cabinet reshuffle, has criticised "unforced errors" by the government over welfare.

In her first broadcast interview since being sacked, she told the BBC's Nick Robinson attempts to cut disability benefits and winter fuel payments had left voters questioning "whose side we are on".

She urged the party's leaders to be clearer about their desire to scrap the two-child benefit cap and move out of a "defensive crouch" on the issue.

 

[brad465]

I suspect the core Labour Party will be looking at this report and laughing:

Corbyn and Sultana clash over new party membership

MP Zarah Sultana says she is a victim of a "sexist boys' club" in row over setting up new left wing party.

www.bbc.co.uk

Ex-Labour MP Zarah Sultana has accused Jeremy Corbyn of overseeing a "sexist boys' club" locking women out of the founding of a new left-wing party the pair announced earlier this year.

In a statement on social media,, external Sultana said she had been sidelined by other members of the party's working group - despite an agreement that she and Corbyn would jointly authorise key steps.

He comments come after Your Party supporters got an email on Tuesday offering £55 memberships only for Corbyn to later dismisses it as "unauthorised" - telling supporters he was seeking legal advice.

Sultana said she had launched the membership website "in line with the road map" set out by the party officials.

 

[simonw]

It is a common misunderstanding that getting people to work harder for less is the way to get to higher productivity. It isn't. And in lots of parts of the economy it simply can't be done. The classical example is a string quartet playing a Mozart work written more than 200 years ago that takes half an hour to play. More than 200 years later it still needs 4 people and half an hour to deliver the same output; nothing can be done to improve their productivity, the 4 people can't play faster, nor can they perform with only 3 people.

A better way is for people to move from a low productivity job to a high productivity job. In ye olden dayes of large bureaucracies, this was done mainly by getting promoted. Now it has to be done mainly through job mobility, and the UK economy doesn't have enough of it. That's partly down to lack of workers rights on day one, losing those rights when people start a new job is a significant disincentive to job mobility. But a far more significant impediment to job mobility is the UK's highly dysfunctional housing market, which has huge incentives encouraging people to stay where they are, and huge disincentives discouraging people from moving.


When automation came to manufacturing, few people could foresee that the jobs would be replaced by call centres. Technological advance will create new jobs, as it always has done.

The best way to improve productivity is to get out of low productivity industries/services and into high productivity industries/services. The UK actually has some excellent opportunities to do this in fields such as life sciences, artificial intelligence, clean energy and entertainment.

The UK needs to concentrate on developing these, not continuing with its obsession with creating/retaining more low productivity jobs, notably in what these days is called hospitality. The UK economy isn't going to get more productive by having more people selling each other cakes and ale. This is particularly perverse in a labour market that has reduced supply because of demographic changes. These can be partially addressed by higher workforce participation, but equipping people with the necessary skills is more important.

Depends what you are as the product 200 years ago if you wanted to hear Mozart you had to find 4 people to play it, and if people 100 miles away wanted to they also had to find 4 people to play it.

Now the same performance can be heard by people the world over at the same time or whenever it suits them.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I suspect the core Labour Party will be looking at this report and laughing:

Corbyn and Sultana clash over new party membership

MP Zarah Sultana says she is a victim of a "sexist boys' club" in row over setting up new left wing party.

www.bbc.co.uk

Yes I had exactly the same feeling. I didn't think they'd have a public falling out this quickly though!

 

[J663738]

Very funny, I for one still support the 'Corbynist People's Front' not that break away faction and some say traitors, 'The Peoples Front of Corbyn'

 

[DarloRich]

I suspect the core Labour Party will be looking at this report and laughing:

I am!

 

[Thirteen]

I suspect the core Labour Party will be looking at this report and laughing:

Corbyn and Sultana clash over new party membership

MP Zarah Sultana says she is a victim of a "sexist boys' club" in row over setting up new left wing party.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sultana IMO always across as a bit student politics, she has a lot of supporters but I can't stand her.

 

[Magdalia]

Depends what you are as the product 200 years ago if you wanted to hear Mozart you had to find 4 people to play it, and if people 100 miles away wanted to they also had to find 4 people to play it.

Now the same performance can be heard by people the world over at the same time or whenever it suits them.

But that's the point. Productivity increases through use of technology, not through reducing the number of workers or getting them to work faster.

 

[edwin_m]

But that's the point. Productivity increases through use of technology, not through reducing the number of workers or getting them to work faster.

It does mean, other things being equal, that fewer string players are needed to satisfy the market for listeners to string quartets. And the demand and hence the fees for live performances might reduce, so string players have to do more of them to break even. Playing the whole thing prestissimo doesn't really figure in this allegory.

However, other things are not equal. It is now much cheaper for people to listen, so more people will do so, meaning that some of the string players no longer needed for live performances will be employed in making recordings. But a much bigger factor is that increasing national prosperity in general means more people will be able to afford to go to concerts. I've no idea how the number of professional string players has changed over time but it wouldn't surprise me if it was much more now than 200 years ago before either of these factors was evident.

This does make a point about inequality. A society with more even distribution of wealth means more people are able to afford things like concerts that promote economic activity and therefore increase prosperity. There is a risk we return to the society of 200 years ago where a few elites live the life of luxury and can listen to a full live orchestra three times a day if they want to, but everyone else has to scrimp to afford the basics.

 

[KevinBrum12]

Sultana IMO always across as a bit student politics, she has a lot of supporters but I can't stand her.

Now she is out of Labour she is likely to lose her Coventry South seat next time round. It is studenty with lots of undergrads for Warwick and Coventry unis. A top target for the Greens who are much more likely to be organised than whatever hard/looney left shambles Corbyn and his new mates come up with.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Is it any wonder many people outside of those bubbles of relative prosperity (though, as noted by @Tetchytyke, even those who should be well off often don't feel it anymore!) are angry and turning their backs on traditional parties in favour of the siren song of Reform? As I've argued repeatedly a lot of Reform's support isn't because everyone outside of London is racist, a lot of it is a scream into the void for someone to do something to help them make their lives less crap.

I couldn't agree more with this. An uncle of mine left school with O Levels and nothing else. He went into the Army, got a load of experience/qualifications in electrical engineering, and left after 14 years. He then walked straight into a job in the early 70s dealing with power/control solutions at the age of 30, where he remained until retirement. By the time he reached his 50s, he was earning very well as a senior electrical engineer, and he refused a managerial job because he enjoyed creating new solutions so much. He retired at 65, with a decent army pension, a decent private pension and his state pension. That wasn't bad going for a boy from a rundown former mining town which had already lost their mine after WW2 because it was simply no longer viable. The company still exists, but the vast majority of their work is no longer for British companies, but rather for foreign ones.

That sort of path is just no longer there for people. If you look at a typical crap ex-mining town, what is there, really? Many people were screwed in a variety of ways, even down to losing their social clubs and football pitches by organisations that are meant to look after them. We're seeing now how many of the 80s/90s leisure centres are being shut down through high costs, and they're simply not being replaced. For all the talk of "things are better", the truth is that life is still absolutely crap in many ways.

 

[brad465]

I couldn't agree more with this. An uncle of mine left school with O Levels and nothing else. He went into the Army, got a load of experience/qualifications in electrical engineering, and left after 14 years. He then walked straight into a job in the early 70s dealing with power/control solutions at the age of 30, where he remained until retirement. By the time he reached his 50s, he was earning very well as a senior electrical engineer, and he refused a managerial job because he enjoyed creating new solutions so much. He retired at 65, with a decent army pension, a decent private pension and his state pension. That wasn't bad going for a boy from a rundown former mining town which had already lost their mine after WW2 because it was simply no longer viable. The company still exists, but the vast majority of their work is no longer for British companies, but rather for foreign ones.

That sort of path is just no longer there for people. If you look at a typical crap ex-mining town, what is there, really? Many people were screwed in a variety of ways, even down to losing their social clubs and football pitches by organisations that are meant to look after them. We're seeing now how many of the 80s/90s leisure centres are being shut down through high costs, and they're simply not being replaced. For all the talk of "things are better", the truth is that life is still absolutely crap in many ways.

Basically social democracy worked and neoliberalism doesn't. There are two problems preventing things improving: 1) Neoliberals own the press and several politicians, so they make sure the right alternatives get no traction and are dismissed as "communism/socialism/Marxist", while giving traction to people like Farage and Trump claiming to be something different, only to be a more extreme version of the status quo. 2) Those who know these extreme alternatives are worse spend too much time attacking them and their supporters, plus less time both explaining the cause of their ills, and proposing realistic solutions and engaging with them. That said their are limits to what can be achieved here because of point 1 and because of FPTP.

What we need among other fixes is a federal UK, with regional state parliaments (a single English parliament won't work, because England is too large). I think Wales and Scotland are better off overall, even where their governments have big issues, because they know what the local/regional issues are and can target them more effectively. A smaller Westminster deals with national matters, while regional devolution through federal parliaments provides funding and powers to better target deprived/run down areas. Incidentally this is something Starmer has talked positively in favour of before, however I suspect the reason he's not currently pursuing it is the time, resources and political bandwidth involved is enormous, and higher priorities exist for now. Also, if it went in the manifesto on top of everything else, many would think there's too much in there to be deliverable in 4-5 years.

 

[KevinBrum12]

Social democracy leads to social mobility and a decent standard of living. While it seems to be accepted in Northern Europe and the continent, in this country we've flitted with Neo-Liberalism (which is not very liberal) on one side and dogmatic leftism practised by the likes of Corbyn on the other. Labour is only now beginning to become a Social Democrat party, New Labour and Corbyn Labour being so far away from that.

We have also struggled to move on from the "know your place" attitude. The most popular British film at the cinema this autumn: "Downton Abbey: The Grand Finale". Not a film set in modern Britain.

 

[Magdalia]

Playing the whole thing prestissimo doesn't really figure in this allegory.

On the contrary, it is at the core of the analogy. The string quartet demonstrates that there are some tasks where productivity cannot be increased by working faster. The other aspect at the core of the analogy is that the string quartet can't improve its productivity by sacking the cellist and playing with only 3 members.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What we need among other fixes is a federal UK, with regional state parliaments (a single English parliament won't work, because England is too large).

Breaking up England in this way, other than possibly London as a federal capital city state, is an absolute red line for me and many others. I would vote against any federalisation plan that included doing so and would prefer a dissolution of the UK than this.

It's a line pushed mostly by those who wanted a USA style EU (or Scottish/Welsh politics of envy) who don't like the power England traditionally holds. The states being different sizes is not a problem if federal matters are handled entirely separately rather than being cascaded up.

 

[Tetchytyke]

dogmatic leftism practised by the likes of Corbyn on the other. Labour is only now beginning to become a Social Democrat party, New Labour and Corbyn Labour being so far away from that.

Not to pick on you personally, but this type of comment goes to show just how far to the right the Overton Window (i.e. the range of centrist opinions) has moved in recent years.

There is no way that Jeremy Corbyn's politics can be described as dogmatic leftism. He's not a Communist, he's not even really a Socialist, he's a soft left social democrat. Even in the 80s, the policies he's calling for wouldn't have been considered unusual.

But the discourse in the media has shifted so far to the right that he's now apparently some sort of raging Communist firebrand.

As for Starmer's Labour, they're centre-right, they're certainly not social democrats. Not with Morgan McSweeney running the show. I'd go so far as to say that Blairism is probably slightly to the left of where Starmer's Labour now is.

Starmer's Labour are making the same mistakes that the Democrats made in the US. By following the media to the right they don't become more electable, they don't attract more voters, they become less electable and attract fewer voters. The right will always see them as liberal Communist losers. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were centre-right in the same mould as Blair, yet look how they're described by the right. But the left will eventually simply stay at home rather than voting for them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2025 ==

Breaking up England in this way, other than possibly London as a federal capital city state, is an absolute red line for me and many others. I would vote against any federalisation plan that included doing so and would prefer a dissolution of the UK than this.

Devolution to the English regions would be much more popular than you seem to think. There are strong local identities in addition to the wider English identities. Giving more power to the local regions is really the only way we get out of the current mess.

 

[rapmastaj]

There is no way that Jeremy Corby's politics can be described as dogmatic leftism.

As for Corbyn not being particularly far-left in his policies, yes I completely agree with you, and despair at how Labour has been devoured by McSweeney's nastiness.

As for the dogmatism though, I have to say Corbyn does appear to be far too dogmatic. He can't understand new problems without looking through the lens of an authoritarian-leaning past, and this shows especially in his attitude towards Russia. It also probably has resulted in his inability to agree with Sultana on how to create a new party.

 

[ainsworth74]

Starmer's Labour are making the same mistakes that the Democrats made in the US. By following the media to the right they don't become more electable, they don't attract more voters, they become less electable and attract fewer voters. The right will always see them as liberal Communist losers. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were centre-right in the same mould as Blair, yet look how they're described by the right. But the left will eventually simply stay at home rather than voting for them.

It's absolutely doing my head in that the likes of McSweeny seem to be blind to this. As far as I'm aware the polling information we have suggests that Labour to Reform switchers are actually quite rare perhaps a fifth of those leaving the Labour party are going to Reform the rest are going to "Don't Know" or Green/Plaid/SNP/Lib Dem. I.e. they're losing most of their votes to the left of where they are not the right. And yet bloody Labour are tacking further and further to the right trying to chase this small minority of votes completely missing the fact that this is electoral suicide.

At best the wider lefty grouping of parties will end up with a similar number of seats to now so some sort of coalition will be possible but more likely is that Reform finish the process of eating the Tories (one thing that does bring me joy is the continuing death of the Tory party even though we do need a sensible right wing party) and unite the right wing vote behind them at which point it becomes extremely dangerous under FPTP that even a small vote share could deliver a huge number of seats. Particularly if the left wing vote fractures again rather than the ruthless tactical efficiency that we saw in 2024.

Absolutely suicidal. The current strategy does nothing but irritate the hell out of your actual base of support driving them to either stay home or vote for other left leaning parties whilst giving ever more salience to the right wing talking points and strengthening their base. All trying to chase voters who will never vote for you anyway because if they wanted Reform like policies on things like immigration they'd vote Reform!

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Not to pick on you personally, but this type of comment goes to show just how far to the right the Overton Window (i.e. the range of centrist opinions) has moved in recent years.

There is no way that Jeremy Corbyn's politics can be described as dogmatic leftism. He's not a Communist, he's not even really a Socialist, he's a soft left social democrat. Even in the 80s, the policies he's calling for wouldn't have been considered unusual.

But the discourse in the media has shifted so far to the right that he's now apparently some sort of raging Communist firebrand.

As for Starmer's Labour, they're centre-right, they're certainly not social democrats. Not with Morgan McSweeney running the show. I'd go so far as to say that Blairism is probably slightly to the left of where Starmer's Labour now is.

Starmer's Labour are making the same mistakes that the Democrats made in the US. By following the media to the right they don't become more electable, they don't attract more voters, they become less electable and attract fewer voters. The right will always see them as liberal Communist losers. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were centre-right in the same mould as Blair, yet look how they're described by the right. But the left will eventually simply stay at home rather than voting for them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2025 ==


Devolution to the English regions would be much more popular than you seem to think. There are strong local identities in addition to the wider English identities. Giving more power to the local regions is really the only way we get out of the current mess.

What a sensible post!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Devolution to the English regions would be much more popular than you seem to think. There are strong local identities in addition to the wider English identities. Giving more power to the local regions is really the only way we get out of the current mess.

Some devolution would be welcome. But breaking up England entirely and leaving it only as a ceremonial entity would not be acceptable.

 

[DarloRich]

There is no way that Jeremy Corbyn's politics can be described as dogmatic leftism. He's not a Communist, he's not even really a Socialist, he's a soft left social democrat.

Corbyn is not a communist but he is a clueless, guileless idiot lacking in even the most basic political antennae! His leadership of the labour party was a disaster for the party and the nation resulting in him being comprehensively rejected, twice, by the electorate. ( but he got a bigger share of the vot.......... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz)

Good riddance.

 

[m0ffy]

Some devolution would be welcome. But breaking up England entirely and leaving it only as a ceremonial entity would not be acceptable.

England already is ceremonial. It’s the only one of the home nations without its own assembly/parliament and its laws cover England and Wales at the lowest level. In a national level, only a handful of departments and agencies are confined to England.

 

[Bletchleyite]

England already is ceremonial. It’s the only one of the home nations without its own assembly/parliament and its laws cover England and Wales at the lowest level. In a national level, only a handful of departments and agencies are confined to England.

Have created a new thread to continue this line of discussion as it's not specific to Labour:

A federal UK?

I think this merits its own thread to see what views are on how this could work. From the Labour thread: England already is ceremonial. It’s the only one of the home nations without its own assembly/parliament and its laws cover England and Wales at the lowest level. In a national level...

www.railforums.co.uk