Mailwatch(ed) Forum

It’s looking good for king of t’ north.

How much free money has he handed out since the last time I checked on him?

Apart from saying he'll cut Welfare, has he given any details of how he's going to fund the Defence shortfall?

Assume the same as Starmer- "salami slicing" budgets, mostly capital ones. Which isn't very good.

Burnham seems very sure that social security cuts play well in Makerfield. He's probably right. Maybe he can get it past backbenchers by sticking it to Thames Water as well. I'd guess he'll restrict the access to PIP of some mental health conditions.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 14, 2026 5:30 pm Burnham's lost bluesky.

In an exclusive interview with The i Paper ahead of Thursday’s Makerfield by-election, Burnham was unequivocal that the pensions guarantee was not up for negotiation – despite pledging to cut welfare to fund defence spending.
“The manifesto commitment holds” on the triple lock, he said, warning that to “tear up the manifesto commitments on the triple lock” would be “a very damaging thing to do.”
However, Burnham did not spell out whether he would look to maintain the policy beyond the current parliament, which is due to end by 2029 at the latest. This is consistent with the current government position on the future of the policy.
His victory in Makerfield would be seen as a potential mandate for a tilt at No 10. Burnham told the BBC’s Question Time audience last week that he would seek to enter any leadership contest and his interventions on national policy are widely interpreted as part of his pitch to become prime minister.

https://archive.ph/2026.06.14-113547/ht ... 0-6713.301

Well there is fuck all else in the welfare budget to cut.

He'll likely do something like what Reeves-Starmer tried with PIP. He'll back his superior political skills to get backbenchers onside. And he'll be putting faith in something like this.

Burnham has told the i in an interview that he would like to see more devolution of employment support policy, and potentially, to regions. In her write-up, Caroline Wheeler says:
[Burnham’s] prescription is to hand far more power over welfare reforms to city regions like his own. Burnham draws on Greater Manchester’s experience of running devolved employment support programmes.
Since 2014, the city region has pioneered its “Working Well” model, which combines employment support with health, skills and housing services and relies on dedicated key workers rather than a standardised national approach. The programme was one of the first examples of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) devolving control over employment support to a city region.

Wasn't this one of Andy's?

I suppose he can do something with thresholds, but I don't think he mentioned that. I've zero confidence he's thought about it beyond walk around Manchester talking to some mates from hospitality who've moaned about Rachel Reeves.

Burnham team tell ministers to delay resignations to avoid chaos
Exclusive: Allies of Labour’s Makerfield candidate concerned rapid collapse of Starmer government would increase instability

Too right it would. Now perhaps somebody can tell Andy to stop pissing about.

So they were planning co-ordinated ministerial resignations to bring Starmer down, were they?

Utter cunts. This whole thing stinks like 3 week old fish fingers.

Total cunts.
Should take a leaf from the Tories book and chuck the fuckers out.

I want names, who are these Labour ministers who want to bring down their own government? Agree with Malc, sling them out, they can fuck off and join Reform.

Funnily enough, earlier I was going to suggest that Streeting should have the whip withdrawn for starters but wondered what others might make of it.

After all, Johnson slung all the moderates out...

Probably too many to sling out, unfortunately.

Oboogie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 17, 2026 9:38 pm I want names, who are these Labour ministers who want to bring down their own government? Agree with Malc, sling them out, they can fuck off and join Reform.

That does rather have the ring of the Trots telling everyone who disagreed with them to fuck off and join the Tories during the Corbyn era though.

However, I agree with the sentiment: it's despicable behaviour worthy of the Tories during 2016 - 2024. And for what? Some shit local government election results, as if that's never happened before?

It's pathetic, and distressing to see Labour has got infested with over-ambitious egomaniacs, egged on by worthless cunts like Kuenssberg, Mason and Rigby.

Burnham team tell ministers to delay resignations to avoid chaos

I presume it's not possible/inadvisible to sling Burnham out of the Labour Party, to teach his Manc Mafia a lesson? Because that's where I'm at now.

I would imagine the screams of "dictator!" would be too much to bear.

Boiler wrote: ↑Thu Jun 18, 2026 9:48 am

Oboogie wrote: ↑Wed Jun 17, 2026 9:38 pm I want names, who are these Labour ministers who want to bring down their own government? Agree with Malc, sling them out, they can fuck off and join Reform.

That does rather have the ring of the Trots telling everyone who disagreed with them to fuck off and join the Tories during the Corbyn era though.

However, I agree with the sentiment: it's despicable behaviour worthy of the Tories during 2016 - 2024. And for what? Some shit local government election results, as if that's never happened before?

It's pathetic, and distressing to see Labour has got infested with over-ambitious egomaniacs, egged on by worthless cunts like Kuenssberg, Mason and Rigby.

The Trots were a bunch of unelectable idiots who didn't want to work with anyone of less than immaculate ideological purity. Burnham's lot want power for their own ends and don't care about the damage.

Boiler wrote: ↑Thu Jun 18, 2026 9:48 am
That does rather have the ring of the Trots telling everyone who disagreed with them to fuck off and join the Tories during the Corbyn era though.

However, I agree with the sentiment: it's despicable behaviour worthy of the Tories during 2016 - 2024. And for what? Some shit local government election results, as if that's never happened before?

It's pathetic, and distressing to see Labour has got infested with over-ambitious egomaniacs, egged on by worthless cunts like Kuenssberg, Mason and Rigby.

Yeah, that over 100 of them couldn't refrain. from telling Starmer to resign is absolutely pathetic. Cabinet level was reasonably solid, it's the backbenchers who bug me.

Backbenchers, AKA Fargle's fifth column.

Boiler wrote: ↑Thu Jun 18, 2026 9:48 am That does rather have the ring of the Trots telling everyone who disagreed with them to fuck off and join the Tories during the Corbyn era though.

If their priority is to bring down the government, defecting to Reform is not only more honourable, it's pragmatic, the polling is clear Reform are the alternative government in waiting.

Tom Baldwin is talking sense.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... re_btn_url

One of the many problems with our politics now is that only the loudest or most discordant voices seem to get heard. And there’s certainly no shortage of people from rival Labour camps mouthing off about what happens next if Andy Burnham wins the Makerfield byelection today. An apparently well-placed source in his team says they are preparing to launch an “immediate leadership challenge” against Keir Starmer on Friday morning, while another briefs that Burnham will hold off – but only for 72 hours because they dare not risk losing momentum. At the very least, there will be a steady escalation of threats and ultimatums.

Meanwhile, the prime minister is said to be barricading himself into Downing Street, where he remains determined to contest a challenge and, according to some reports, will insist any member of the cabinet backing his rival must quit. For instance, some of his aides have been operating on the assumption that Ed Miliband, who has done little to conceal his desire for Starmer to go, will resign over the next week. Although this is vigorously denied by the energy secretary, along with claims that he is “ghosting” the prime minister’s calls, it has not stopped some hardline loyalists expressing unnecessary relish at the prospect of a more enforced cabinet departure for Miliband.

All this suggests that the high drama post-Makerfield that most of the media have predicted will be duly delivered. Yet there are also softer, and therefore less often quoted, voices who counsel caution to Starmer and Burnham.

Those helping Burnham prepare for government recognise that, having not been a minister for 16 years or an MP for nine, he could do with a longer run-up before leaping straight into Downing Street. Some have concerns about a policy programme that, vibes aside, seems remarkably similar to that being pursued by the current prime minister. They worry about polls showing the Greater Manchester mayor’s rating with voters has slipped into net negative figures since he made plain his desire to run the entire country. Others know he risks alienating a section of Labour MPs and members who are loyal to Starmer and believe the government is finally beginning to notch up some real achievements. Burnham’s supporters say lessons have to be learned from Wes Streeting’s frantic and ultimately unsuccessful efforts to trigger a leadership contest last month when, as one puts it, he “tried too hard to kick down the door”.