Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Seems like Andy's dropped the 10% VAT on hospitality and is now talking about reforming business rates. This is all sounding rather like the "failing" Reeves-Starmer approach.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -ministers

Andy Burnham says he will end culture of briefing against female ministers
PM hopeful tells meeting of women’s parliamentary Labour party that any staff who undermine female members of his team will be sacked

The context of this is that some women MPs felt that Starmer's team briefed against women ministers more than men. I don't know if that's true- Lou Haigh, for sure, but Miliband has had briefing against him. Of the others mentioned, I've not noticed Bridget Philipson or Yvette Cooper being on the wrong end. And Starmer's relationship with Reeves has been good. I almost wish he'd briefed a bit more against Shabana Mahmood. But briefing against other ministers shouldn't happen, full stop. Andy might need to sack a few of his own supporters, some of whom have been briefing against Miliband and others against Streeting when it comes to the choice of Chancellor.

Is this true? Hard to say, without being there.

“Rooms where decisions are being made are often closed to us, leading to blind spots in appointment decisions and policy development. The tendency of previous leaderships to sideline the voices of women makes us a weaker government,” the letter read.

Or does this just mean decisions are made that they don't like? The main reason for unpopular decisions being made is cost. Rachel Reeves would have been involved in most of those, with other women involved as Treasury ministers. It's not been one of those governments where the women just get told to do the girly nurses and teacher stuff by any means.

Burnham left with £4.7bn bill for Starmer’s new defence investment plan
Ally of PM-in-waiting says four-year boost for the armed forces is an ‘unexploded bomb’

I guess this sort of briefing is OK because it's only shitting on Starmer.

Total spending in the last year was £1,362bn. In those terms, it's not really very much.

All good, but this rather dated Oasis, puffy-chested nonsense seems rather overblown. Are the new king' advisors scared of him already?

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 9:01 pm

Burnham left with £4.7bn bill for Starmer’s new defence investment plan
Ally of PM-in-waiting says four-year boost for the armed forces is an ‘unexploded bomb’

I guess this sort of briefing is OK because it's only shitting on Starmer.

Total spending in the last year was £1,362bn. In those terms, it's not really very much.

This has been met with cries of sabotage.

Boo fucking hoo.

Does Burnham really think he can just bring down a Labour PM only two years into a five year mandate, with all sorts of policies and manifesto commitments in train, and just fucking start again with a clean slate?

It doesn’t work that way, Andy.