The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

[AlterEgo]

I was just re-reading this thread and for some reason this post didn’t register with me the first time around but if what is reported is true then it is unbelievable.

What on earth is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom doing wasting his time on dealing with auto-renewable subscriptions when there are many, many more serious issues which should be demanding his attention?

I get relentlessly told that the increasing presidentialism of the role of Prime Minister is made up and "you don't vote for PMs", but this is clearly untrue. This sort of direct intervention in matters which should be the preserve of one of his ministers is exactly what I mean. See also the XL Bully stuff with Sunak and any number of policies which PMs make into a popular agenda to identify them with. It's really unserious stuff to be honest.

Auto renewing subscriptions are a bit of a scourge but they are not a top level issue and more of our politically infantilised population should realise where in the priority tree this sits.

 

[sor]

I was just re-reading this thread and for some reason this post didn’t register with me the first time around but if what is reported is true then it is unbelievable.

What on earth is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom doing wasting his time on dealing with auto-renewable subscriptions when there are many, many more serious issues which should be demanding his attention?

A short list of really serious issues in no particular order:

• how do we create a social and legal framework which will encourage enterprise and the creation of jobs?
• how to get the UK economy to expand under the current world wide trading conditions?
• how do we protect ourselves against international blackmail whereby some state potentially could threaten a tactical nuclear strike on our North Sea windfarms?
• what steps can be taken to ensure energy sources are diversified and less exposed to international shocks?
• what steps can be taken to cope with the possibility of restrictions in the supply of important raw materials?
• how do we encourage the development of an independent computer, software and electronic communications industry operating under UK - or at least EU - law?
• given the changing climatic conditions what steps could/should be taken to ensure that domestic food production is maintained?

These are the sort of issues that should concern the Prime Minister. Any perceived issue which has occurred because of automatically repeating subscriptions should have been treated at ministerial level and not get elevated to the Cabinet. By getting himself involved in trivialities Burnham is doing nobody any favours and is showing himself to be as much a populist as Boris Johnson. Oh dear.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Sep 2026 ==


What's a 'guidebook' grandad?

Starmer was in large part toppled because of the perception that he wasn't doing anything useful and the stuff that his government was doing was not being publicised well (eg immigration and asylum numbers coming down, deportations up, etc). Burnham slapping his name onto some relatively simple changes that the average person will notice is the complete reversal of that.

I think you're probably overestimating how much effort he personally put into it though. Probably directed one of the No 10 minions to get started on how to effect the change, maybe a Labour party minion wrote the column, and he just had to approve it.

I don't really see a problem with it. Governments can do multiple things at the same time. I'd even go as far as to suggest that we should have a minister whose responsibility is to look at these smaller ways to improve people's lives. We should have someone who looks at banning onerous terms and conditions, the way private equity has got into vets, doctors, dentists and the like, someone who can unblock life's annoyances. It won't stop the defence minister concentrating on Russia's latest plans for NATO, or the climate change minister looking at what we need to do to adapt to the new normal

 

[Tetchytyke]

What on earth is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom doing wasting his time on dealing with auto-renewable subscriptions when there are many, many more serious issues which should be demanding his attention?

The Prime Minister can think about more than one thing at once.

Auto-renewal and scammy subscriptions cost the UK economy billions of pounds a year. Why shouldn’t the government regulate it better? And why shouldn’t the PM advertise a policy that his government are implementing?

 

[styles]

I was just re-reading this thread and for some reason this post didn’t register with me the first time around but if what is reported is true then it is unbelievable.

What on earth is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom doing wasting his time on dealing with auto-renewable subscriptions when there are many, many more serious issues which should be demanding his attention?

It's a 750 word opinion piece. I could write that over my morning breakfast. He might have even had it ghost-written. It's not like he's spent weeks developing it. And he could well just be fronting the policy on behalf of a department which has developed it.

A short list of really serious issues in no particular order:

• how do we create a social and legal framework which will encourage enterprise and the creation of jobs?
• how to get the UK economy to expand under the current world wide trading conditions?
• how do we protect ourselves against international blackmail whereby some state potentially could threaten a tactical nuclear strike on our North Sea windfarms?
• what steps can be taken to ensure energy sources are diversified and less exposed to international shocks?
• what steps can be taken to cope with the possibility of restrictions in the supply of important raw materials?
• how do we encourage the development of an independent computer, software and electronic communications industry operating under UK - or at least EU - law?
• given the changing climatic conditions what steps could/should be taken to ensure that domestic food production is maintained?

These are the sort of issues that should concern the Prime Minister. Any perceived issue which has occurred because of automatically repeating subscriptions should have been treated at ministerial level and not get elevated to the Cabinet. By getting himself involved in trivialities Burnham is doing nobody any favours and is showing himself to be as much a populist as Boris Johnson. Oh dear.

It is possible for people to work on multiple things at once. For each of those bullet points you can either find examples of Burnham talking about the issue since taking up office, or you could reasonably assume are being developed in the background, probably by people who are experts in their field, e.g. I wouldn't expect the PM to personally be developing a mitigation plan for, "international blackmail whereby some state potentially could threaten a tactical nuclear strike on our North Sea windfarms".

 

[Yew]

What on earth is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom doing wasting his time on dealing with auto-renewable subscriptions when there are many, many more serious issues which should be demanding his attention?

How much time do you think he has actually been spending on this, I'd daresay that the ministers are doing the work, and he spent little more time than doing the announcing of it.

 

[jon0844]

What on earth is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom doing wasting his time on dealing with auto-renewable subscriptions when there are many, many more serious issues which should be demanding his attention?

I'm sorry, but things like this are actually very important. My mum got renewed into an annual subscription she didn't want and once renewed could not cancel (well, she could but they wouldn't refund - they just said the account would close after the year). I also forgot to put a note in my calendar to cancel the renewal of a VPN.

I strongly suspect there are millions of examples. Likewise, making it a requirement to be able to cancel something you set up online - not having to call up and wait on hold, potentially being passed from person to person as they try and put you off (or just end the call). No three months notice by post and other stuff.

The EU is going quite strong on a lot of this, as well as right to repair and improving consumer protections.

Yes, there might be bigger things to deal with too - but this is all the sort of thing that impacts everyone. Sure, the VPN subscription I didn't want (and was more expensive because renewals don't come with the big discounts) didn't break the bank for me, but it was annoying. I bet it can hurt other people, and a lot of people don't have loads of money to throw away.

You could argue it's their fault, of course. But there's a reason why auto renewals and perpetual subscriptions are a thing - because people don't cancel and often forget.

For one thing, my VPN provider never emailed me to remind me that my subscription was going to renew or what the price was. They'd argue they said that when I subscribed in the first place. So while they may email about this, that, and the other - they deliberately don't tell you when they're going to take money. If they did, you might stop to think if you want to renew.

To be fair, a lot more companies DO now tell you and often tell you multiple times - but I am not sure they're required to, and that's probably the issue the Government needs to address.

Sorry for the long post, but the average man and woman needs more protection from big businesses taking advantage of consumers.

 

[GusB]

I strongly suspect there are millions of examples. Likewise, making it a requirement to be able to cancel something you set up online - not having to call up and wait on hold, potentially being passed from person to person as they try and put you off (or just end the call). No three months notice by post and other stuff.

Recurring subscription payments are fairly low down the pecking order but they are a bloody nuisance and can add up to a fair amount if you're not paying attention. It's not so bad for things like Amazon Prime (to which I occasionally subscribe to in order to get free delivery) because I can cancel right away and not worry about it auto-renewing. To be fair to Amazon, on the one occasion where I had forgotten to cancel and was charged, I was swiftly refunded without question.

However, I recently had a three-month free Spotify subscription and lost out on a few days because I cancelled before the end; it's not a consistent experience. Sure, you can argue that it's the customer's own fault for either not understanding the terms or for not setting a reminder, but this is what these companies are relying on.

I'd be interested to see how much money these companies make on subscriptions for services that go completely unused.

 

[Cdd89]

I think I would actually go even further and say that services should not be allowed to renew automatically, full stop.

Companies would be able to make it very easy to buy another term (and they would!)

 

[The exile]

How much time do you think he has actually been spending on this, I'd daresay that the ministers are doing the work, and he spent little more time than doing the announcing of it.

Remember Jim Hacker’s amazement on entering No 10 at the remarkably small amount of “work” (in the sense that a minister would understand it) that a PM actually “has” to do.

 

[jon0844]

I think I would actually go even further and say that services should not be allowed to renew automatically, full stop.

Companies would be able to make it very easy to buy another term (and they would!)

I think you should be given the option. If there's a subscription you want to keep (for example, a home security application or something) then let it renew. Likewise, if you're happy with Amazon Prime and use it all the time, let it renew BUT only if you ask it to. There should be an opt-out, as there is with some insurance policies I've got.

Auto renewal without a choice should be banned. I get that companies may argue they can't afford to give a free trial if they can't be sure of most people forgetting to cancel, but that's kind of the point of wanting to stop it.

 

[The exile]

I think you should be given the option. If there's a subscription you want to keep (for example, a home security application or something) then let it renew. Likewise, if you're happy with Amazon Prime and use it all the time, let it renew BUT only if you ask it to. There should be an opt-out, as there is with some insurance policies I've got.

Auto renewal without a choice should be banned. I get that companies may argue they can't afford to give a free trial if they can't be sure of most people forgetting to cancel, but that's kind of the point of wanting to stop it.

Ultimately, the only reason for having auto-renew at the end of a free trial is to catch people who aren’t so convinced of the product that they want to keep going with it. Companies should at the very least have to remind you in time that your paid subscription is about to kick in.
Auto renewal on existing paid subscriptions is perfectly reasonable - as long as you can also cancel with “reasonable notice” at any time.
. I woukd suggest that “reasonable notice” would be no more than to the end of the following month unless there are very pressing reasons for it to be longer.

 

[jon0844]

Ultimately, the only reason for having auto-renew at the end of a free trial is to catch people who aren’t so convinced of the product that they want to keep going with it. Companies should at the very least have to remind you in time that your paid subscription is about to kick in.
Auto renewal on existing paid subscriptions is perfectly reasonable - as long as you can also cancel with “reasonable notice” at any time woukd suggest that “reasonable notice” would be no more than to the end of the following month unless there are very pressing reasons for it to be longer.

I suppose a cooling off period after a renewal would be good too.

 

[Yew]

Sorry for the long post, but the average man and woman needs more protection from big businesses taking advantage of consumers.

I would argue that protecting people from the most predatory practices of big businesses is exactly the sort of thing a Labour Prime Minister should be doing.

 

[Cdd89]

I think you should be given the option. If there's a subscription you want to keep (for example, a home security application or something) then let it renew.

The reason I prefer my more radical idea is because it gets the incentives the right way around. Whatever well-intentioned regulation the government come up with, companies will continue looking for loopholes to continue to make it difficult to cancel.

If you flip it around and say that auto-renewal is banned outright, I guarantee you will not find it hard to renew. Your home security application will have a huge button labelled "Renew now!" that extends your subscription with one tap. The very slight inconvenience of that will be offset by all the services you've forgotten you don't use anymore, but haven't got around to cancelling.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Sorry for the long post, but the average man and woman needs more protection from big businesses taking advantage of consumers.

Amen.

My biggest gripe is with the scammy subscriptions which hide what they are. The ones I really hate are the ones you get advertised when you've bought something online, there's a big box saying "click here to save £20 on your next order" or something like that. People click it but they don't realise that they've been signed up to some marketing subscription where, for just £20 a month, they'll give you £10's worth of discounts.

You see similar with promotional offers for things like wine or coffee or makeup by mail order. The advert says you can buy a thing for a modest discount- enough of a discount to be attractive but not enough to scream scam. You buy it and right at the bottom, hidden in the tiniest print, is something saying you're actually signing up to a monthly or annual subscription.

At least with a free trial of something like Spotify you actively sign up to it and you can diarise when the trial ends and make sure you cancel it. How can you cancel something you didn't know you signed up to?

 

[jon0844]

The reason I prefer my more radical idea is because it gets the incentives the right way around. Whatever well-intentioned regulation the government come up with, companies will continue looking for loopholes to continue to make it difficult to cancel.

If you flip it around and say that auto-renewal is banned outright, I guarantee you will not find it hard to renew. Your home security application will have a huge button labelled "Renew now!" that extends your subscription with one tap. The very slight inconvenience of that will be offset by all the services you've forgotten you don't use anymore, but haven't got around to cancelling.

Agreed, but there will be some side effects. If the number of accidental renewals drop, or the people who join a gym and stop going after a month can cancel easily, the loss of income will have an impact.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not suddenly going against what I said above or not agreeing entirely with what you say, but this will be the case. Will it mean prices go up? Possibly, but you'd hope competition would stop that happening.. but we often don't have true competition anymore.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Tuesday at 14:48 ==

Amen.

My biggest gripe is with the scammy subscriptions which hide what they are. The ones I really hate are the ones you get advertised when you've bought something online, there's a big box saying "click here to save £20 on your next order" or something like that. People click it but they don't realise that they've been signed up to some marketing subscription where, for just £20 a month, they'll give you £10's worth of discounts.

At least with a free trial of something like Spotify you can diarise when the trial ends and make sure you cancel it. How can you cancel something you didn't know you signed up to?

My son is learning this as he has signed up for some services offering discounts either at account sign-up (which come with a regular payment) or after ordering something and being told he can get cash back (also a subscription service) or has qualified for discounts on affiliated companies (which can be another account sign up with the possibility of a commitment of some sort).

If we think things are bad here, at least we are more in line with the EU and have some regulations to prevent blatant scamming. In the USA, it's ridiculous and campaigners like Louis Rossman have stated many times that companies breaching rules usually get nothing but a warning or a miniscule fine that means they're emboldened to carry on, and encourage other businesses to do the same. In the USA, most states allow companies to force you to send a letter to cancel a subscription by certified mail - which means having to drive to a post office. Unsurprisingly, many people just put it off indefinitely and keep the subs going.

 

[Broucek]

Tackling every day irritations is a good idea. But the big picture is being ignored - in particular, debt interest costs keep going up. We therefore need to raise more in taxes and/or decrease spending. That implies serious choices being made....

 

[The exile]

The reason I prefer my more radical idea is because it gets the incentives the right way around. Whatever well-intentioned regulation the government come up with, companies will continue looking for loopholes to continue to make it difficult to cancel.

If you flip it around and say that auto-renewal is banned outright, I guarantee you will not find it hard to renew. Your home security application will have a huge button labelled "Renew now!" that extends your subscription with one tap. The very slight inconvenience of that will be offset by all the services you've forgotten you don't use anymore, but haven't got around to cancelling.

The removal of auto-renew on various insurance policies left me without cover for several weeks. I thought it had auto renewed, but somewhere on about page 3 it pointed out that this was no longer an option. It was only when I realised the premium hadn’t been taken that I spotted it. OK - it was my fault, but I think auto renewals on something you’re already paying for (provided that auto renewal doesn’t include any massive price-hikes) is ok.

 

[Harpo]

Tackling every day irritations is a good idea. But the big picture is being ignored

The big picture won’t be getting ignored. Healey’s first budget statement will be the unveiling of the masterplan and I doubt we’ll get a drip-feed of anything concrete before then, just the usual media spin and speculation driven by their own agendas.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I think auto renewals on something you’re already paying for (provided that auto renewal doesn’t include any massive price-hikes) is ok.

If it’s something you know you’re paying for and want to keep paying for, yes. Trouble is, all the scammy subscriptions will simply claim you signed up, wanted to remain signed up, and knew about the auto-renewal.

At least if auto-renewal is banned outright everyone knows where they stand.

 

[jon0844]

The removal of auto-renew on various insurance policies left me without cover for several weeks. I thought it had auto renewed, but somewhere on about page 3 it pointed out that this was no longer an option. It was only when I realised the premium hadn’t been taken that I spotted it. OK - it was my fault, but I think auto renewals on something you’re already paying for (provided that auto renewal doesn’t include any massive price-hikes) is ok.

I had my car insurance company email me to say they'd cancelled the auto renew and I don't recall them saying why.

Auto renew was an option I was able to toggle on my online account, but perhaps they'd auto selected it and were made to cancel it without me having first set it.

It very nearly could have caught me out too.

I'm happy to set auto renew for something like this but have a reminder set so I can still shop around and change if I want.

It's too important a thing to have cancel without my knowledge, and like a lot of people, I get a lot of junk and marketing emails that can make my inbox fill up daily which makes it easier to miss an email. That's why I set calendar reminders (and would recommend people do this for things like railcards that don't auto renew).

 

[zero]

I would never willingly choose to auto-renew. If I had inadvertently done so, an annual auto-renewal would fail because I wouldn't have known to remember to unblock the relevant card or transfer money into the relevant account.

But clearly auto renewal works for some people so I think the best solution would be:
1) the default setting to be off, so you have to proactively opt in.
2) auto renewals should have a cooling-off period equivalent to as though you are signing up for the first time.
3) proper enforcement (but I keep hearing that Trading Standards is overworked so maybe there isn't enough money to enforce it anyway...)

 

[jon0844]

Best solution is to give people a choice when they sign up, with proper reminders if you opt-in to give you time to reconsider and - as suggested by someone else - a cooling off period so if you do get a subscription renewed, you can cancel within 7-14 days (albeit having to pay pro rata for the time used).

We've seen examples now of why some people would want a continuous subscription, and many more on why you might not.

I really do think these sorts of thing are exactly what the PM should be looking at during a clear and obvious cost of living crisis.

 

[Cdd89]

I do fully agree it's an appropriate thing for the PM to be commenting on, but probably not to be working on.

Successful policy like this needs someone technocratic, thinking what the loopholes will be and how it will be enforced. Because if there are any opportunities for companies to avoid the spirit of these regulations, they will. I'm already highly dubious and expect this to be a nothingburger; hopefully I'm proved wrong!

 

[Mogster]

I find subscriptions where you have to phone to cancel the most irritating. You should be able to cancel online if you’ve taken up the sub online. Happy with auto renewal as an option. Off by default.

Anyway, this is small beer. Still waiting to find out what Burnham is actually going to do.

 

[Cdd89]

Anyway, this is small beer. Still waiting to find out what Burnham is actually going to do.

To be fair it can't be that small if it's generated two pages of discussion!

But I do agree with your point – he needs to pair the small specific stuff with the big strategic stuff. To wit:

This sort of direct intervention in matters which should be the preserve of one of his ministers is exactly what I mean.

So far Burnham's strategy seems to have been the opposite: make the small announcements himself and leave bigger, potentially controversial strategic announcements (change of position on Israel, for example) to ministers.

I suspect the play is to try and stay popular, but unless he takes ownership of big strategy it'll just mean a different kind of unpopularity!

 

[Broucek]

So far Burnham's strategy seems to have been the opposite: make the small announcements himself and leave bigger, potentially controversial strategic announcements (change of position on Israel, for example) to ministers.

I suspect the play is to try and stay popular, but unless he takes ownership of big strategy it'll just mean a different kind of unpopularity!

Poems on the Underground (Roger McGough)

I wanna be the leader
I wanna be the leader
Can I be the leader?
Can I? I can?
Promise? Promise?
Yippee I'm the leader
I'm the leader

OK what shall we do?

 

[jon0844]

Poems on the Underground (Roger McGough)

I wanna be the leader
I wanna be the leader
Can I be the leader?
Can I? I can?
Promise? Promise?
Yippee I'm the leader
I'm the leader

OK what shall we do?

Sure that wasn't written by Nigel Farage?

 

[Broucek]

Sure that wasn't written by Nigel Farage?

I'm not a fan, but unlike Andy B, he's not actually in a position to pull any public policy levers...

 

[Sorcerer]

Sure that wasn't written by Nigel Farage?

I'm not a fan, but unlike Andy B, he's not actually in a position to pull any public policy leavers...

Nigel Farage also has definitive goals for what he would want to do as Prime Minister; ie. scrap net zero climate targets, net zero immigration, low taxation, and harder Brexit in favour of closer relations with the Trump Administration. Indefensible and unrealistic as some of them are he's not exactly asking questions about what to do as Reform Party leader. Meanwhile even as Prime Minister I'm still not quite sure what Andy Burnham stands for, and I still don't know what this so-called "Manchesterism" ideology consists of.