Bridget Phillipson remaining as Women and Equalities Minister is another indication, if any were needed, that the reversal of trans rights will continue under Burnham. Best we can hope for is that the EHRC guidance will be widely ignored and Labour under Burnham will move onto other issues.
Personally, I was sad to see no role for Darren Jones, David Lammy or Hillary Benn. All three are effective media performers and ministers, and have between them lots of experience. Similarly, Emily Thornberry would be an asset, tho she's doing a good job in the select committee.
A contribution worthy of a Pulitzer! Please, point to the reference in your biography of him where you can identify his alleged intellectual feebleness that went unnoticed during his time at SOAS or Harvard, or in his seven ministerial roles spanning 24 years.
He’s already made his factionalism and disloyalty clear with his criticism of the energy VAT cut. He hitched himself to the Starmer bandwagon and has lost out as a result.
Many people in Wales are pleased to see the back of Jones. When First Secretary to the Treasury he told a Welsh MP in the House that Wales should be "a little more grateful" for £43m rail funding over 10 years (about what it's going to cost to refurbish Leeds Station) despite the government agreeing that rail in Wales is chronically underfunded and having supported in opposition the notion that it is unfair that Scotland and NI get Barnett consequentials for HS2 but Wales does not, it having been declared an England and Wales project despite being of no benefit to Wales.
This is the sort of thing - there's much more - which, added to Welsh Labour's record in Cardiff, led to Labour's collapse in the recent Senedd election.
Fair point, and I wasn't aware of that rather stupid comment. I did, however, find him quite refreshingly authentic in his comms, even if what he said isn't always what I would have liked him to say.
Yes, and as someone who works in the sector (and in Greater Manchester), it's an important distinction. But you do have to start somewhere, and rough-sleeping is the hard end of it, so it's a natural place to start. His ABEN scheme in GM has really made a difference, but it can't be done in one place and not others, so I have real hope after his announcement yesterday.
I suspect Mahmood is still there because the Immigration & Asylum Bill has yet to clear committee stage, so she’s got to own the implementation and outcomes, and to progress the recently announced new safe and legal routes, and fix the mess around visa rules that caused the flap with Mike Tapp. If she does these she might stay; if any of it comes unstuck, he’ll fire her later.
I suspect sacking Mahmoud would have immediately elevated immigration policy to the top of the media debate, and drowned out everything else. Perhaps better to let her steep in her own poison until he has made a visible impact elsewhere. Tackling homelessness will inevitably clash with Home Office ruthlessness towards would be immigrants. Home Secretaries are notoriously vulnerable to events, and an opportunity to sack her later will surely arise if her approach cannot be detoxified.
Healey as Chancellor is a good choice. He strikes me as a serious thinker who will address the blockers in HM Treasury. However he like Burnham, has two years to make some radical change. That's not long. But I hope he and they can pull it off.
I think it's a dreadful reshuffle. He's ended up with big beasts in jobs they're manifestly unsuited for (Miliband, Streeting, Cooper) which they've only got as consolation prizes. He's promoted his friends, despite some of them being useless. We've got the ultimate "safe pair of hands" at the Treasury, when Reeves demonstrated that what we actually need is a flash of genius. And you can hardly say "he wants a place for everyone" after he's taken an axe to the Starmer loyalists, regardless of performance.
I meant Reeves' pedestrian style was so clearly inadequate, it showed that we needed something completely different. Sorry - I should have spelled that out.
Even if it is strategic to leave Mahmood in post, it sends a terrible message, and means the anti-immigration policies continue. The enabling of racism and right wing anti-immigrant rhetoric will continue.
On a personal level, I have a daughter that has been in the UK on different visas for close to 10 years but because they were the 'wrong' ones, and she doesn't cross the bar for salary (and how many Brits do meet that threshold?), she can't settle here.
On an economic level, it is a wildly self-harming strategy, threatens the eduction sector, and harms the UK's reputation and soft power.
I will not be voting for labour with these appointments.
The Greens are cheering. Burnham’s own goal with Mahmoud will help them maintain their momentum. Farage self destructing has also been a shot in the arm for Zack Polanski as he gets even more airtime to light fires underneath Burnham.
Other disasters you missed in your giddy love in with the new PM include the capitulation to fossil fuel lobbying over Rosebank and Jackdaw and silence on Gaza and depositing Palestine Action. Cody Darler’s excoriation of Burnham on the former is my pick of the week. As for the Israel question, with Mahmoud left wielding instruments of torture as well as continuing to sell them to Netanyahu I’m still backing Polanski over your Manchester crush.
This commentary is politically illiterate: e.g. Corbyn actually tried to assemble a broad based opposition cabinet only to have all the right wing / Blairite faction tantrum and refuse to work with a left leadership
Andy Burnham deserves a go on the Andy Warhol principle that in the future everyone will be Prime Minister for 15 minutes
Burnham has pretty much purged the Blairite zombie tendency and gone broadly based Gordon Brown protege plus recent talent
It’s not a left-wing Labour takeover but it’s a positive leftward shuffle
I actually wonder if nobody else would accept the immigration role. It’s a poison chalice.
Our fundamental approach to immigration needs to change. The NHS can’t function without migrant workers, nor can other sectors like social care and agriculture.
Welcome immigrants, but with rules about if you want the economic benefits of living in the UK, you have an obligation to embrace British values. Denmark requires all immigrants to take compulsory language and culture lessons , enrol their children in Danish speaking nurseries and schools, and they have a one strike and you’re deported approach to criminal activity. Similar rules in Germany. If they can do that within the framework of the ECHR, then so can we.
The first stop should be abolishing the distinction between asylum seekers and economic migrants as the two overlap considerably, and allow asylum seekers to work, even make it compulsory to work.
Nandy remains at Culture. WTAF? She has been useless.
Weird, weird choices.
Bridget Phillipson remaining as Women and Equalities Minister is another indication, if any were needed, that the reversal of trans rights will continue under Burnham. Best we can hope for is that the EHRC guidance will be widely ignored and Labour under Burnham will move onto other issues.
Not ‘reversal of trans rights’ but ‘reassertion of rights, and indeed law which never ought to have been ignored in the first place’.
Personally, I was sad to see no role for Darren Jones, David Lammy or Hillary Benn. All three are effective media performers and ministers, and have between them lots of experience. Similarly, Emily Thornberry would be an asset, tho she's doing a good job in the select committee.
Maybe their vowels are too Southern?
Seriously? David Lammy is a towering ignoramus.
A contribution worthy of a Pulitzer! Please, point to the reference in your biography of him where you can identify his alleged intellectual feebleness that went unnoticed during his time at SOAS or Harvard, or in his seven ministerial roles spanning 24 years.
Lammy! Seriously? Poisonous, posturing oaf. Glad to see the back of him.
I had a lot of time for Lammy until he inserted himself into JD Vance's rectum
Darren should be in a Cabinet role.
I think the spiteful little comment on X has shown that he is not quite as dedicated to the good of the country as I would’ve hoped.
He’s already made his factionalism and disloyalty clear with his criticism of the energy VAT cut. He hitched himself to the Starmer bandwagon and has lost out as a result.
Many people in Wales are pleased to see the back of Jones. When First Secretary to the Treasury he told a Welsh MP in the House that Wales should be "a little more grateful" for £43m rail funding over 10 years (about what it's going to cost to refurbish Leeds Station) despite the government agreeing that rail in Wales is chronically underfunded and having supported in opposition the notion that it is unfair that Scotland and NI get Barnett consequentials for HS2 but Wales does not, it having been declared an England and Wales project despite being of no benefit to Wales.
This is the sort of thing - there's much more - which, added to Welsh Labour's record in Cardiff, led to Labour's collapse in the recent Senedd election.
I'm sorry Timpson is going.
Did Timpson fall, or was he pushed?
Not sure, though I've looked, which is why I stuck with "going"
I think he came to work with and for KS, so it’s sort of logical that he left when he did
Fair point, and I wasn't aware of that rather stupid comment. I did, however, find him quite refreshingly authentic in his comms, even if what he said isn't always what I would have liked him to say.
Contempt really isn't refreshing. More generally I always found him too pleased with himself, though he's not alone in that
I don't think Burnham promised to end homelessness, he promised to end rough sleeping, which is not the same thing.
No mention of losing Timpson? Hermer?
Yes, and as someone who works in the sector (and in Greater Manchester), it's an important distinction. But you do have to start somewhere, and rough-sleeping is the hard end of it, so it's a natural place to start. His ABEN scheme in GM has really made a difference, but it can't be done in one place and not others, so I have real hope after his announcement yesterday.
I suspect Mahmood is still there because the Immigration & Asylum Bill has yet to clear committee stage, so she’s got to own the implementation and outcomes, and to progress the recently announced new safe and legal routes, and fix the mess around visa rules that caused the flap with Mike Tapp. If she does these she might stay; if any of it comes unstuck, he’ll fire her later.
I thought Mahmood would stay. Burnham would want her to own the immigration policy until he can review it and appoint someone else.
I suspect sacking Mahmoud would have immediately elevated immigration policy to the top of the media debate, and drowned out everything else. Perhaps better to let her steep in her own poison until he has made a visible impact elsewhere. Tackling homelessness will inevitably clash with Home Office ruthlessness towards would be immigrants. Home Secretaries are notoriously vulnerable to events, and an opportunity to sack her later will surely arise if her approach cannot be detoxified.
Sacking Mahmood would have also given Farage an unnecessary lift and the main priority has to be to stop him.
I finely nuanced observation. I think - I hope - you may be right.
It’s been a welcome clear out of underachievers and Shabana should’ve gone too.
Healey as Chancellor is a good choice. He strikes me as a serious thinker who will address the blockers in HM Treasury. However he like Burnham, has two years to make some radical change. That's not long. But I hope he and they can pull it off.
I think it's a dreadful reshuffle. He's ended up with big beasts in jobs they're manifestly unsuited for (Miliband, Streeting, Cooper) which they've only got as consolation prizes. He's promoted his friends, despite some of them being useless. We've got the ultimate "safe pair of hands" at the Treasury, when Reeves demonstrated that what we actually need is a flash of genius. And you can hardly say "he wants a place for everyone" after he's taken an axe to the Starmer loyalists, regardless of performance.
Yvette wanted to leave the FO. She really disliked the travelling.
Was she unaware that was a feature of the job before taking it on!?
Reeves demonstrated genius ? I must have missed that, could you remind me when that occurred ?
I meant Reeves' pedestrian style was so clearly inadequate, it showed that we needed something completely different. Sorry - I should have spelled that out.
Do you not recognize sarcasm? The point clearly was that she was not a genius.
Even if it is strategic to leave Mahmood in post, it sends a terrible message, and means the anti-immigration policies continue. The enabling of racism and right wing anti-immigrant rhetoric will continue.
On a personal level, I have a daughter that has been in the UK on different visas for close to 10 years but because they were the 'wrong' ones, and she doesn't cross the bar for salary (and how many Brits do meet that threshold?), she can't settle here.
On an economic level, it is a wildly self-harming strategy, threatens the eduction sector, and harms the UK's reputation and soft power.
I will not be voting for labour with these appointments.
The Greens are cheering. Burnham’s own goal with Mahmoud will help them maintain their momentum. Farage self destructing has also been a shot in the arm for Zack Polanski as he gets even more airtime to light fires underneath Burnham.
Other disasters you missed in your giddy love in with the new PM include the capitulation to fossil fuel lobbying over Rosebank and Jackdaw and silence on Gaza and depositing Palestine Action. Cody Darler’s excoriation of Burnham on the former is my pick of the week. As for the Israel question, with Mahmoud left wielding instruments of torture as well as continuing to sell them to Netanyahu I’m still backing Polanski over your Manchester crush.
This commentary is politically illiterate: e.g. Corbyn actually tried to assemble a broad based opposition cabinet only to have all the right wing / Blairite faction tantrum and refuse to work with a left leadership
Andy Burnham deserves a go on the Andy Warhol principle that in the future everyone will be Prime Minister for 15 minutes
Burnham has pretty much purged the Blairite zombie tendency and gone broadly based Gordon Brown protege plus recent talent
It’s not a left-wing Labour takeover but it’s a positive leftward shuffle
"she cannot competently not run her department"
Is that double negative intended?
I couldn’t not wonder the same! 🫠
My view on John Healey to the Treasury - you complained, you sort it!
I actually wonder if nobody else would accept the immigration role. It’s a poison chalice.
Our fundamental approach to immigration needs to change. The NHS can’t function without migrant workers, nor can other sectors like social care and agriculture.
Welcome immigrants, but with rules about if you want the economic benefits of living in the UK, you have an obligation to embrace British values. Denmark requires all immigrants to take compulsory language and culture lessons , enrol their children in Danish speaking nurseries and schools, and they have a one strike and you’re deported approach to criminal activity. Similar rules in Germany. If they can do that within the framework of the ECHR, then so can we.
The first stop should be abolishing the distinction between asylum seekers and economic migrants as the two overlap considerably, and allow asylum seekers to work, even make it compulsory to work.
Interesting read. Nothing to say about Defence and Wes Streeting though?
For me this is almost worse than keeping Mahmood in position.