The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[martin butler]

Worth noting that defence spending is probably less effective at stimulating the economy pound for pound than many other spending areas, though I don't disagree that it's necessary for other reasons. Spending in any sector increases general economic activity, but sectors other than defence also generate benefits for people using the products or services produced as a result. Defence "products" are (we hope) never used so don't bring that second benefit, so it's really about avoiding disbenefits.

(note, I use "benefits" here in the wider sense of good things that happen, not that of payments to people deemed to need extra funds)

One option I think might be worthwhile, would be to enter an agreement with Saab to build here in the UK, an anglicized and Maritime compliant version of the Gripen powered by the RR2000 engine, with latest upgrades of systems, I would also cancel any future orders for the F35, and take one of the QE2 Carriers out of service for rebuilding with catapult launch systems, Having a Maritime version of the Gripen, means it would have a stronger structure and heavy duty undercarriage, which means it's rough airstrip capability would be greater, and having folding wing tips, means smaller space needed to rearm, and refuel, which means you have a fighter / ground strike capability that is as good as anything, , and no tie to unreliable American manufacturers, who can no longer be trusted. Something other NATO countries might find more reassuring, as the current administration probably have already given the Russians the latest upgrades that are planned on every US design.

 

[TravelDream]

Nobody who reached the State Pension age on or after 6 April 2016 (currently men under age 75 and women under age 73) with enough years of National Insurance to receive the full new State Pension will be entitled to Pension Credit.

No doubt that is, or was when setup, the intention. But it doesn't remove the unfairness of the current system.

Plus Pension Credit will continue for the foreseeable due to the significant numbers who will reach retirement age with very limited NI contributions.

Though, again, I think it's silly we pretend that people's NI contributions pay for their pensions (they don't) or there's a pension pot (there isn't). They may as well just pay everyone the new state pension regardless of NI contributions if they live here and are citizens (for non-citizens continuing the contribution link still makes sense).

A funded local transport scheme, that also includes some reopening schemes, where there is a strategic need for safeguarding against possible loss of routes to erosion, landslips etc,

Britain's resistance to investing in and developing infrastructure has always been one of our greatest downfalls.
Urban rail/ tram projects across Brtiain's 'northern' cities (Liverpool/ Manachester/ Nottingham/ Leeds/ Birmingham) would give a significant economic boost to those regions.
It has the additional benefit of reducing carbon emissions among many others.

But it isn't so and isn't likely to be.

 

[jfollows]

I will not be eligible for Pension Credit, free TV Licenses and so on, and I can live with that, but there’s no way that I will not claim a benefit to which I am entitled, free prescriptions for example or whatever. I don’t respect people who won’t claim eligible benefits, but that’s their choice, so I don’t disrespect them either. I just find it strange that people don’t claim an entitlement, especially when not doing so won’t benefit anyone else, but that’s their choice.

 

[ChrisC]

I have to agree. I was happy with limiting the Winter Fuel Allowance to people on Pension Credit and some on other benefits. I see no justification for this paying this £200 or £300 (over 80s) Winter Fuel Payment each year to everyone over the State Pension age when the new State Pension increased by £470 a year in April 2025 alone.

I agree with the Labour Government's revised policy limiting this to people with an annual taxable income of less than £35,000, this still saves £500 million a year, and I certainly do not blame the Labour Government at all for this partial U turn. They were faced with many people over the State Pension age voting against them on this issue even though many of those people do not need this Winter Fuel Payment.

I do not agree with this Winter Fuel Payment and I have opted out of receiving it for the rest of my life.

I certainly do not agree with paying a Winter Fuel Allowance to wealthy pensioners, but do think that limiting it to only those receiving Pension Credit was a bit too drastic a cut. I now think that the partial U turn of paying to those with a taxable income of under £35,000 is set at too high a level. My taxable income is quite a bit less than £35,000 but I don‘t need the Winter Fuel Allowance. I won’t opt out of receiving it but prefer to donate it to a local organisation which will help people who need it to benefit. I give mine to a local church which runs a well being and drop in centre for people who do need help and support. The church is really struggling to pay heating bills to open and run this group, so I would rather they have my money than it remains with the government to spend it on things which I may not agree with.

 

[jfollows]

I agree that if I were to be eligible for something like the Winter Fuel Allowance I would probable take it and give it to my charity of choice, definitely rather than not claim it at all anyway.

 

[ainsworth74]

The clear intention is the number of people entitled to Pension Credit will diminish over time and it will eventually disappear.

Just a footnote here but whilst it's possible there was an intention to phase out PC overtime, the reality on the ground is that it will be with us for a long time yet.

A number of people still reach pension age without a full NI record so don't receive the full New State Pension. They also tend not to have sufficient alternative resources to exclude them for entitlement to PC.

Even for those that do have a full entitlement, there will be plenty who remain entitled even so due to disability, or having dependent children (or more likely grandchildren) as those come with extra amounts which can tip someone into being eligible. In the future rental costs will also be in included bringing more people with the PC system (as there is an intention to bring Housing Benefit into PC just as it was for working age people with UC).

Certainly there was an intention to reduce the amount being claimed but events at the very least mean that any intention to be rid of PC via a natural decline in claims are no more.

 

[WelshBluebird]

To be fair, most people who want benefits cuts are more about cutting the benefits paid to working aged adults who are able to work.

Much of which are paid to people who do actually work!

Aside from ensuring entitlement checks are suitable, I have no desire to see any cuts from those who cannot work.

The key question is who decides that? If someones doctor thinks they are medically unfit to work, why should some random person who isnt medically trained get to disagree with that?

And what about cases where a person can work given support and modifications to what is expected by the employer, but where no employer actually is willing to deal with what when they can just employ Joe blogs who doesn't need that additional support.

 

[Topological]

Much of which are paid to people who do actually work!

The key question is who decides that?

And what about cases where a person can work given support and modifications to what is expected by the employer, but where no employer actually is willing to deal with what when they can just employ Joe blogs who doesn't need that additional support.

Well... quite.

The accommodation to employment thing is very important. We need to make many more advances in that direction. However, that is more about the way that the government work with potential employers.

Whilever paying employers (or top-up benefits for those who do work) is perceived as a bad thing then it is unlikely any progress will be made. I get the impression that many would prefer not to "subsidise low wages" as the argument goes.

On who certifies ability to work, then that has to be qualified professionals. My understanding is the present system is far from perfect in that regard, but that is not to say it could not be better. I have seen systems where self-certification is valid for short periods to ease pressure on the certifying of longer term cases, so maybe the answer is somewhere there.

 

[martin butler]

Very often people will make assumptions about things they really don't know much about, often on what they read on Facebook, or some other media, much of it uninformed and misleading, but to the reader, its fact, it's their version of truth, Thing is not every disability is visible, and as has been shown, in a lot of cases, people wrongly decide that someone's getting something they're not entitled to, without knowing the full picture.

 

[Topological]

Very often people will make assumptions about things they really don't know much about, often on what they read on Facebook, or some other media, much of it uninformed and misleading, but to the reader, its fact, it's their version of truth, Thing is not every disability is visible, and as has been shown, in a lot of cases, people wrongly decide that someone's getting something they're not entitled to, without knowing the full picture.

Absolutely, hence the real importance of having a system that people have confidence in.

Currently, those who do play the system give those who need help a bad name. That is not a good thing and why playing the system is not "harmless".

 

[brad465]

Looks like Burnham might have a route back to Westminster:

Labour ex-minister to step down as MP - potentially paving way for Andy Burnham to run for parliament

Andrew Gwynne's constituency has been touted as a potential seat for Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, who could challenge Sir Keir Starmer. But the "King of the North" would face a number of hurdles before he could enter parliament.

news.sky.com

A suspended Labour MP is expected to announce he is retiring, triggering a by-election.

Andrew Gwynne, who was suspended from Labour over offensive WhatsApps, will soon retire from his Gorton and Denton constituency in Greater Manchester on medical grounds, Sky News understands.


This would trigger a by-election.

The former Labour health minister is sitting as an independent while he awaits the results of a parliamentary standards investigation.

His departure could pave the way for Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham to become an MP, a step he would need to take to challenge Sir Keir Starmer for the Labour leadership.



One of the most popular figures in the Labour Party, Mr Burnham has long been rumoured to be considering a return to Westminster politics.

After a series of resignations and sackings from Sir Keir's close circle, rumours ramped up in September that Mr Burnham was looking to challenge the prime minister.

 

[Broucek]

I'm not a big fan of Burnham but he's a much more credible candidate than Angela Rayner....

 

[Gloster]

Looks like Burnham might have a route back to Westminster:

Labour ex-minister to step down as MP - potentially paving way for Andy Burnham to run for parliament

Andrew Gwynne's constituency has been touted as a potential seat for Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, who could challenge Sir Keir Starmer. But the "King of the North" would face a number of hurdles before he could enter parliament.

news.sky.com

Personally, I think Burnham would be ill-advised to seek the seat, even if the law or Labour Party rules permit him to hold such posts at the same time. If he resigned as mayor he would give the impression that he was ratting on the city for personal ambition’s sake, but if he didn’t he would be at risk of making a mess in one post. He has then got to get elected, which is not going to be so easy with Reform riding high: a by-election defeat would look bad. Even if elected he has got to get himself amongst the leading candidates to replace Starmer (not so difficult with the second-raters in Cabinet) and then for Starmer to either resign early enough to allow Burnham to get a grip on things or just after scraping through the 2029 election.

I think he would be much better to see out his mayoral term, take a rest and then grab a seat of someone retiring at the general election. He would then be well-placed to challenge for the leadership, even if Starmer goes soon after the election.

 

[muz379]

Personally, I think Burnham would be ill-advised to seek the seat, even if the law or Labour Party rules permit him to hold such posts at the same time. If he resigned as mayor he would give the impression that he was ratting on the city for personal ambition’s sake, but if he didn’t he would be at risk of making a mess in one post. He has then got to get elected, which is not going to be so easy with Reform riding high: a by-election defeat would look bad. Even if elected he has got to get himself amongst the leading candidates to replace Starmer (not so difficult with the second-raters in Cabinet) and then for Starmer to either resign early enough to allow Burnham to get a grip on things or just after scraping through the 2029 election.

I think he would be much better to see out his mayoral term, take a rest and then grab a seat of someone retiring at the general election. He would then be well-placed to challenge for the leadership, even if Starmer goes soon after the election.

I do kinda hope we don't end up with Burnham running tbh . And tbh I think the labour party NEC will block it with everything they've got.

But given the specific demographics of that constituency I don't think it's the shoe in Reform might think it is. On the Tameside side sure but the other half of the constituency doesn't look like fertile ground for reform. They only just scraped the Helsby by election on what should have been more fertile ground and when they were rallying in the polls which they seem to have taken a bit of a slow down in after a series of high profile conservative deflections. That being said I can see the Greens doing well as well so it's not a Labour shoe in.

I think it's more likely reform could win the mayoral election that would take place if Burnham resigned that position.

 

[jfollows]

Boris Johnson was able to be Mayor of London and MP for Uxbridge simultaneously, but Andy Burnham can’t be Mayor of Manchester and MP for Gorton and Denton simultaneously because his job as mayor includes the role of Police & Crime Commisioner (to be abolished, for sure) and PCCs are explicitly prohibited from also being MPs.

I agree that Burnham would be better continuing to serve as Manchester Mayor rather than resigning and becoming an MP. He‘s been elected to do a job and he’s doing it, representing Manchester.

It’s rubbish that Boris could do it, but they’re the rules.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The Labour Party Rulebook 2025 Clause IV 2 requires Combined Authority Mayors in England including the Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham to seek the express permission of the Labour Party National Executive Committee before seeking nomination as Labour candidates for the Westminster Parliament. I think the chances of Andy Burnham getting such permission are zero.

https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Rule-Book-2025.pdf

Clause IV. Selection of Westminster parliamentary candidates

2. All nominees must fulfil the criteria to stand as a parliamentary candidate detailed in Clause I.1.B above. In addition, no person who has
been disqualified as a local government candidate under the rules of the Party or by the decision of Party conference shall be eligible for nomination or selection as a parliamentary candidate. Combined or Single Authority Mayors and Police and Crime Commissioners must seek the express permission of the NEC/SEC/WEC (as applicable) before seeking nomination as Labour candidates for the Westminster Parliament. The NEC/SEC/WEC’s decision shall be final.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I guess its worth saying that another suspended Labour MP, Dan Norris, was mayor of WECA (West of England combined authority) when he got elected as an MP in the area. He was allowed to do so (and it was actually a good win, beating Rees Mogg), but his moonlighting was not popular locally (with either Westminster constituency voters or WECA mayor voters) and he ultimately wasn't allowed to stand again for the mayorship due to Labour party rules and Labour lost the election to the greens - not solely down to him but I imagine it didnt help (ignore, got confused with the council elections). And then he was arrested in 2025 for some pretty horrific stuff but somehow is still an MP.

Long way of saying - be wary!

 

[weeklycommuter]

I guess its worth saying that another suspended Labour MP, Dan Norris, was mayor of WECA (West of England combined authority) when he got elected as an MP in the area. He was allowed to do so (and it was actually a good win, beating Rees Mogg), but his moonlighting was not popular locally (with either Westminster constituency voters or WECA mayor voters) and he ultimately wasn't allowed to stand again for the mayorship due to Labour party rules and Labour lost the election to the greens - not solely down to him but I imagine it didnt help. And then he was arrested in 2025 for some pretty horrific stuff but somehow is still an MP.

Long way of saying - be wary!

The election for the Mayor of the West of England Combined Authority on 1 May 2025 was won by the Labour candidate Helen Godwin who is now the Mayor.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The election for the Mayor of the West of England Combined Authority on 1 May 2025 was won by the Labour candidate Helen Godwin who is now the Mayor.

My bad confusing it with the bristol council elections. Serves me right for multitasking!
But still even ignoring the now known reasons for his arrest, and the since revealed toxicity at WECA in his time, trying to do two the two jobs did not make a good impression at least with the people I know!

 

[BAFRA77]

No doubt the utterly inept McSweeney is already starting to pull levers to stop Burnham from getting on any shortlists as the NEC would need to approve anything.

Although - as it is McSweeney in charge - then PM Burnham might not be far off the horizon.

 

[brad465]

And then he was arrested in 2025 for some pretty horrific stuff but somehow is still an MP.

Long way of saying - be wary!

Norris has survived because the investigation by the police is still ongoing and he hasn't gone to trial yet. If he is found guilty then he will almost certainly be gone, either because the sentence is long enough for automatic expulsion, or an inevitable recall petition passes, or he sees the writing on the wall and steps down immediately after a guilty verdict. But until then, innocent until proven guilty.

 

[edwin_m]

My bad confusing it with the bristol council elections. Serves me right for multitasking!

You or Dan Norris?

But still even ignoring the now known reasons for his arrest, and the since revealed toxicity at WECA in his time, trying to do two the two jobs did not make a good impression at least with the people I know!

There was also Ben Bradley who was an MP and leader of the local council and at the same time standing for Metro Mayor. He is now none of these.

 

[DarloRich]

There was also Ben Bradley who was an MP and leader of the local council

and now a tory whopper recycled into a Reformer

The Labour Party Rulebook 2025 Clause IV 2 requires Combined Authority Mayors in England including the Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham to seek the express permission of the Labour Party National Executive Committee before seeking nomination as Labour candidates for the Westminster Parliament. I think the chances of Andy Burnham getting such permission are zero.

Is he actually going to give up being the Mayor of Manchester for a chance ( perhaps a thin one) of being PM? I cant see it. He has stood and failed to win the labour leadership twice before. Is he even going to win the seat with the number of, er, low information voters leaning towards reform?

I voted for him when he stood against Clownbyn but he was miles behind in the final vote. Yes, there were lots of fellow travellers and cranks allowed to vote in that election that wont be in any future election but still.

( he was 4th the first time he stood after Gordon Brown stood down but he was, pollitically, very young then)

I think he would be much better to see out his mayoral term, take a rest and then grab a seat of someone retiring at the general election. He would then be well-placed to challenge for the leadership, even if Starmer goes soon after the election.

but then he might not have a chance at being PM.......................

 

[weeklycommuter]

Is he actually going to give up being the Mayor of Manchester for a chance ( perhaps a thin one) of being PM? I cant see it. He has stood and failed to win the labour leadership twice before. Is he even going to win the seat with the number of, er, low information voters leaning towards reform?

Certainly if I were in Andy Burnham's shoes I would stay as Mayor of Manchester and not even consider standing for Parliament.

 

[muz379]

Certainly if I were in Andy Burnham's shoes I would stay as Mayor of Manchester and not even consider standing for Parliament.

Same , but the difference is we are thinking about things logically

Politicians at that level don't always think in that way they sometimes let blind ambition take over.

Of course the other thought that would be at the back of my mind is what's the point in being Mayor of Manchester if there's a Reform PM and Chancellor in Number 10 and 11 that won't let me do any of the things I want anyway.

 

[Megafuss]

I've got go no truck with Starmer, but I really hope Burnham stands to be an MP...then loses against Reform. It will effectively end his political career and a fitting end to a snivviling fairweather weasel.

King of the north? King of sitting in a small room, believing his own hype and smelling his own farts!

 

[Trackman]

I've got go no truck with Starmer, but I really hope Burnham stands to be an MP...then loses against Reform. It will effectively end his political career and a fitting end to a snivviling fairweather weasel.

King of the north? King of sitting in a small room, believing his own hype and smelling his own farts!

Burnham is go!
Safe labour seat, or is it, as you say.

Andy Burnham has announced that he is seeking permission to stand in the upcoming Gorton and Denton parliamentary MP by-election.
Currently mayor of Greater Manchester, he insisted he wants to back the Labour government "not undermine it" and said that the decision to announce his intentions had been "difficult".
The seat in Greater Manchester is vacant after Labour's Andrew Gwynne stood down on Friday as MP on health grounds.

Andy Burnham seeks permission to stand in by-election

He says in a statement that he wants to back the Labour government "not undermine it".

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[weeklycommuter]

Burnham is go!
Safe labour seat, or is it, as you say.

Andy Burnham seeks permission to stand in by-election

He says in a statement that he wants to back the Labour government "not undermine it".

www.bbc.co.uk

Andy Burnham has just told the whole world that he is not interested in doing the job of Mayor of Greater Manchester and that the job of Mayor of Greater Manchester is less important that being in Parliament.

Even if he continues as Mayor of Greater Manchester due to not being allowed to stand, not being selected or not being elected as the by-election candidate he will have no credibility as Mayor of Greater Manchester because he has just told the whole world that he does not want the job.

The message that being the Mayor of a combined authority with devolved powers is less important than being in Parliament is not the message that Labour politicians should be sending with the policy of devolving power from central Government.

 

[PGAT]

What are the chances this gets approved?

 

[Mogster]

I think it’s easy to underestimate how big the draw of being PM is to these types. It’s like captaining a Champions League winning football team or being F1 World Drivers Champion.

Blackballing him would look very bad on Starmer surely? Burnham could still lose, Reform are going to throw everything they have at this now.