"Andy Burnham has been on manoeuvres for some time and, assuming he secures a parliamentary seat, will be among the favourites to win any leadership contest. He would also represent the party’s best hope of making an electoral recovery."
1. Securing a seat is a big ask. The party has a women first policy and any appountment of Burnham to be a candidate will have to have the blessings of a Starmer controlled NEC.
2. Even if he's selected it doesn't mean he'll win.
3. Those outside of Greater Manchester don't understand how hated he is by most people outside of the city centre yuppies and the various liberals , greens, lefties and BBC types in Chorlton and Didsbury. Most ordinary people here dislike him because of his low emission zone idea that floundered due to a massive opposition campaign and also his associations with Gary Neville (to whom he's just granted an investment of £16m by the Greater Manchester employees pension fund), his former nightime Czar Sacha Lord (who doesn't seem to have repaid the £400,000 that the Arts Council mistakenly awarded his company during Covid) and the various apartment developers throughout the region. Add to that his desire to grant Manchester United, a football club in terminal decline but partly owned by one of Britain's richest men, no less than £2 billion (with a b) of public funds to build a new stadium)
4 And let's not forget how few votes he got in the 2015 leadership election when he managed just 19%.
Oh, and a key person in his campaign is none other than Dogwistle Lucy.
Let's not forget just how useless this woman is. She's never had a proper job in her life. At least Rayner worked as a cleaner in the past. All this half-wit has done is work in politics and she hasn't done very well in that. She was responsible for electing Crazy Ed Moribund as Labour Leader. Remember Crazy Ed's tablet of stone on which he engraved his policies? The idea was that these were written on tablets of stone and wouldn't be broken until Dogwhistle Lucy explained that "I don't think anyone is suggesting that the fact that he's carved them into stone means that he is absolutely not going to break them or anything like that." Since she became an MP she's tried to shut down free speech and claimed that welfare cuts could start a run on the Pound. Finally, her response to a simple question if she'd seen the rape gangs documentary caused her to blurt out "Oh, we want to blow that little trumpet now, do we? Yeah, OK, let’s get that dog whistle out.” Dogwhistle Lucy. What an idiot
Dogwhistle Lucy repeatedly claims that she was born in edgy Moss Side to try and elevate her working class credentials. However, although she was born in Moss Side she certainly wasn't brought up there. Her family quickly moved to the trendy, salubrious and very leafy South Manchester suburb of Didsbury where Richard and Judy used to reside when they lived in the city. She went to both primary and secondary schools in Didsbury. As Jim Royle might have said, "Working class, my ...."
He is also mentioned as being one of the main culprits in trying to stop the Grooming & Rape Gangs enquiries. If the full truth of his involvement comes out into the public sphere he will stand no chance at the ballot box.
Great point Iris. TBH, I don't think he's got a chance at the ballot box anyway. One of his other claims to fame is that he paid his wife's company many millions to develop the low emission zone software. Another one is that when the public outcry against such a stupid and anti-poor scheme became too strong to ignore, he paid another company no less than £88 a sticker to cover up the signs warning that you would be entering the zone. £88 for every little sticker measuring 10" x 4". And he thinks he can run the country? He couldn't run a burger van.
Well, clearly YOU don't like Andy Burnham, but the evidence for his popularity across Greater Manchester is there in his three mayoral election victories.
He got 63%, 67% and 63% of the vote in 2017, 2021 and 2024 respectively.
By contrast, you tories got 22%, 19% and 17% in those elections.
So he clearly is a very popular politician.
However, much as I admire him, and voted for him as leader in both 2010 and 2015, I disagree with those who would seek to replace Keir Starmer this side of the next election.
Starmer won the Labour leadership fair and square and then became one of only four Labour leaders in our party's history (out of the 19 we've had) to win a Parliamentary majority.
So he deserves the opportunity to serve his full term.
And I think he can win again if he takes some of Paul's tips here.
Jeeze. You are correct Karl. I don't like Burnham personally because of his shady dealings and I don't like his politics either. But if you think for one minute that he's popular in Greater Manchester then you need to give your head a wobble. As I said he's popular within a certain demographic most of whom bother to vote in these elections. In the last contest, Burnham was re-elected with just 420,749 votes from an adult population of 2.5million (which includes over 100,000 students). Burnham is only liked amongst my Labour friends but I can assure you that almost everyone else despises him.
If you think Andy Burnham, or Starmer is the answer I'd advise you to amend your medication.
And once again, you clearly don't like him, OK I get that.
But he does win elections by very, very large margins. Three times he has taken more than 60% of the vote and three times you tories have taken around 20% of the vote.
There's no other evidence of popularity other than election results.
In the 2024 general election, Labour were elected on just 33.7% of the vote. In 2019, Corbyn got 32.1% of the vote and that was considered disastrous by the Blairites in the Party from Starmer to Streeting to Burnham. It gets worse. Starmer benefitted from the decline of the SNP vote and his 33.7% includes a 1.4% uplift in the Scottish vote that he got thru none of his own doing and that Corbyn didn't have the benefit of. Take that away from Starmer's 33.7% and you have 32.3% which is just 0.2% higher than Corbyn in 2019. Oh, and in 2017, Corbyn got 40%. Starmer didn't win this election. The Tories threw it away by trying to be LibDems.
It's true that Starmer, in 2024, received only a marginally larger vote share than Corbyn had achieved in 2019.
It's also true that Starmer actually received fewer votes numerically fewer votes numerically in 2024 (9,708,716) than Corbyn in 2019 (10, 268,051).
But my response to this is 'So what?'
The only thing that matters is winning or losing.
If my football team scores just one goal and wins 1-0, it's clearly a far, better result than scoring three goals but losing 3-4 isn't it?
Between now and the next election, the challenge for Labour is to be strategically intelligent, adopt some of the ideas set out by Paul here - and also build on the positive steps already taken.
Then we have every chance of winning back some of the support we may have lost to the Greens, to the likes of SNP or to the Corbyn movement.
If we can do that, and if the Reformists and Conservatives are still fighting over the right-of-centre political terrain, we could well win another majority.
I do stress the word 'could' here, because equally we may lose. But my point is I can see a potential route to victory.
It's not about winning and losing if you have a moral bone in your body (lads, I know, I know). It's about being honest with the electorate about your plans and then getting their approval for those plans by winning the election with a decent share of the popular vote.
It is not about saying one thing and doing the opposite and neither is it introducing major legalisation like ending Jury trials and digital ID without a popular mandate.
The reason for why you and they have done this is because you arrogantly believe that you are cleverer than the electorate, that you know what's good for them and they don't, so you'll tell them a pack of lies and then make them take the medicine that you've prescribed and forced down their throat.
Jesus Christ Almighty Karl, you really are on a different planet to the majority of the population and Labour are on the same planet. The latest polls show Labour on just 14% which is less than half of the pathetic 33.7% of the general election result just 18 months ago. Wake up and smell the coffee Karl.
Yes indeed, if you only look at the one polling company ('Find Out Now') which routinely scores Labour the lowest, then you'll find very low Labour indications. By contrast, 'More in Common' and 'YouGov' have Labour 6%/7% higher.
But opinion polls this far out from the next general election are pretty meaningless. In 1981, opinion polls had the then Labour leader Michael Foot at 50% and Margaret Thatcher barely above 20%. Yet the 1983 general election was a landslide Thatcher victory.
A lot can change in a couple of years.
But a lot can change even during a campaign.
Labour's Harold Wilson famously had a 12% opinion poll lead just a week before polling day in 1970. But he then lost to the Conservative Edward Heath. And in 2017, Theresa May led Jeremy Corbyn by 22% on the day she called the election, but Corbyn reduced that deficit to just 2% by election day.
Opinion polls are irrelevant to me.
I think Labour, under Starmer, have every chance of winning again - if they take some of the advice Paul offers here.
Here's and example of Burnham's duplicity. He claims that not a penny of public funds will go into the building of Manchester United's new stadium. What he failed to say was that £2 billion (with a B) of public funds will be required to move the RailFreight depot from Manchester to Newton-le-Willows. United need the terminal land so they can build the new stadium and keep the old one open whilst the new one is finished and if Burnham doesn't move the terminal with public funds, the new stadium won't be built.
So why doesn't the richest man in Britain who is the key shareholder in United pay for this key factor himself? Well,that's because he's got his friend Burnham who loves to hobnob with the rich and famous to persuade Starmer's corrupt Government to pay for this key aspect out of public funds.
Oh, and why Newton-le-Willows? Oh that's because Burnham grew up there and where his family and old friends live. What a hero.
Oh, oh. Burnham's hobnobbing no bounds such that a man who'd never met Mani in his life, managed to get into his funeral with Neville and Beckham. Great photo opportunity eh?
As usual Paul, you have “cut through the crap” and got to the nub of the matter, however you haven’t mentioned the increasing rise of secular politics, many spectators are expecting that Labour will take as big a kicking in the North from the Pro Gaza movement as they will from Reform UK in the South.
Personally I find this very dangerous, especially if reports of the existing Gaza MP’s not being receptive to constituents not of their diaspora.
Anyhow, I have enjoyed reading your work during 2025, and wish you and yours all the best for 2026.
The current state of British politics is worrying and depressing.
People are understandably disappointed and disillusioned with the two main parties but seem only too willing to throw their lot in with inexperienced and somewhat unrealistic outsiders, as long as they say the right thing.
Sometimes I feel we are all taking part in some giant reality show, where the novelty contestant gets the most votes!
We will have the choice of 2 proven disasters or 1 possible newbie with their hearts in favour of the interests of the UK and her people and 1 another newbie full of cranks and weirdos who have no more iea of what needs to be done to get the UK out of this mess than my cat.
Thank you Paul for your logical wisdom for the year ahead. Also, I’d like to wish you the very best 2026 has to offer and takes care of you and your family very kindly 🙏
Thanks for the article Paul and this in particular...
'The government must use its massive fiscal capacity to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and public services, invest in the productive sector and deliver full employment and higher wages.'
...is absolutely spot on, as is your other key point that our government must get a grip on migration. (In my opinion, the only way to stop the small boats is to deploy the Royal Navy, humanely but firmly, to return the 'passengers' to the shore they departed from.)
I do think Labour can recover and win again - opinion polls are notoriously both unreliable and highly changeable. The Reformists and Greens may be polling well right now, but each of them will receive a brutal reality check when they discover that real politics demands hard choices.
It would be a massive mistake for Labour to seek to portray the Reformists as some kind of re-incarnation of fascism against which 'all decent people' must unite. That is a nonsense in my opinion. The best way to counter-act Reform is to consistently drum it home that it is an alternative tory party, as much a part of the wider tory family as the Conservatives and focus strongly on its neo-Thatcherite economic agenda.
'Dark blue or light blue - they're all tories' should be the key message I think.
If we can do this, as well as halting the small boats, and carrying out the fiscal policy you've set out, then Labour can win again.
With literally every local council where the grooming gangs largely operated and left to inflict horrors on local girls were labour councils. Frankly I think labour is the cease pit of politics. They are a disgrace. So drumming home that reform are just an extension of the tories sure beats being the party that covered up for 1000’s of peadophiles to rape and torture underage girls for decades.
It was actually a Labour MP, Ann Cryer (Keighley), who was the first to sound the alert over this and to demand action.
As for other scandals, it was your tory PM Margaret Thatcher who gave the rapist (and staunch tory-supporting) Jimmy Saville full and unfettered access to those poor girls whom he abused.
Congratulations. You have managed to pit the victims of one sexually exploited group against another rather than having to admit that labour presided over most of the councils where the abuse took place. Saville was a monster and his victims were also let down by too many people and institutions that covered for him because he generated money for them. BBC, NHS and the Tory party. As for Ann cryer, she was treated appallingly by the Labour Party for speaking out, she was branded a racist, bullied, harassed and ostracised within the party. Maggie Oliver had to resign from the police to expose what was going on. I happen to hold the Tories with almost as much contempt because they didn’t do anything about it either. No political party owns my vote. Ideas win me over not blind ideology.
The reason I like to read Paul’s articles is because he is willing to criticise and own the failings of the Labour Party, he doesn’t hold a candle to them or make excuses for them. If more people like Paul held more sway and influence within the Labour Party I could see myself putting an X in the box. I just happen to think the current bunch in power are useless, visionless, with absolutely no principles and dangerous because they think they are really clever. But I can see your thinking. If Starmer stops a few boats and Reeves tinkers with the sums before the next election that should do it. Second term secured!
Ann Cryer was the first to blow the whistle on the rape gangs but her exposes were quashed by none other than her own party who accused her of racism and Islamophobia.
Interesting that 20 years later in a town the other side of Bradford from Keighly, that a grammar school teacher lost his job and was forced into hiding for following the curriculum. With this incident, you'd think that the teaching unions, the Labour Party, the police and the Left in general would have been firmly on his side. Instead they all rounded on him and supported the Muslim protesters. Incredible.
And although Anne Cryer was the first the raise this issue, she got nowhere because Labour shut her up and it was actually Tommy Robinson who brought it back to many people's attention including who Andrew Norfolk of the Times was the first mainstream journalist to expose it.
And when he did, you know full well what happened. Those on the Left accused him of Islamophobia and racism for exposing the ritual rape, torture and kidnapping of young girls as young as 10.
You and the rest of your immoral political mates should be hanging your heads in shame.
Burnham’s skyscraper tycoon takes £40m dividend after taxpayer loan
Yet another article on the strange relationship between Burnham and a multi millionaire property developer from The Telegraph
A skyscraper tycoon backed by Andy Burnham took £40m in dividends from a taxpayer-backed project in Manchester, The Telegraph can reveal.
Daren Whitaker moved the money over a period of three years from WB Developments, a company backed by Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA).
It was received by another company owned by Mr Whitaker.
The disclosures, contained in Companies House filings, will heighten scrutiny of the relationship between the GMCA and Mr Whitaker, who has received more than £700m in taxpayer loans to build luxury skyscrapers in Manchester.
Under a loan agreement seen by The Telegraph, Mr Whitaker’s WB Developments was barred from paying dividends “except with the prior written consent of the lender”.
The dividends were awarded in instalments between 2017 and 2019 from WB Developments, which received £42.5m in cash from the GMCA to help build Wilburn Basin, a 491-bedroom apartment block in Salford.
The first was a £17.7m dividend in 2017, followed by £15.4m and £6.8m in payments in 2018 and 2019.
Mr Whitaker is the ultimate owner of WB Developments, according to filings on Companies House, which falls within his Renaker empire.
The payments were made despite restrictions on dividend payments contained in the initial £42.5m loan agreement between the GMCA, which is chaired by the Mayor of Greater Manchester
All very interesting. But Labour are surely screwed now as they have revealed themselves to be working for other interests and other governments - the 'British working classes' are the last people on their list. Labour (like US Democrats) can only exist by CHEATING AND LYING; they clearly hate democracy.
I think it’s a bit too early to say how things will turn out in 2026 but more people do seem to believe conflict on different fronts, both at home & abroad appears increasingly likely. The new Home Secretary has started to formulate a plan to lower migration, but will be thwarted by CS & LW MP’s, ECHR. Labour will continue to shoot themselves in the foot - “build council home for refugees” etc.
The litmus test will be in May. As with Plaid in Wales, I’d expect tactical voting to be the thing that excites the media hacks the most.
Paul, I would respectfully say that I fear you may be falling into the trap of the main stream media by getting too interested in the local government election results. Sure, Reform and the Greens will do really well at the expense of the main parties. Partly from a protest vote against the current (and previous) government and partly because they can make vague promises about local issues without talking too much about national policy objectives. This is particularly the case for the Greens, who won't have a chance in hell at the next general election when their Marxist, open boarder and environmental extremist policies are exposed in full.
I've no doubt there are people in the Labour party who would like to replace Starmer with someone who would favour their preferred policies. But there are many more that know how division is the kiss of death when in power.
As history has shown, we are just too far away from the next general election to draw any conclusions about it's outcome. I'd be interested in hearing in more detail what you would like to see to turn things around.
"Andy Burnham has been on manoeuvres for some time and, assuming he secures a parliamentary seat, will be among the favourites to win any leadership contest. He would also represent the party’s best hope of making an electoral recovery."
1. Securing a seat is a big ask. The party has a women first policy and any appountment of Burnham to be a candidate will have to have the blessings of a Starmer controlled NEC.
2. Even if he's selected it doesn't mean he'll win.
3. Those outside of Greater Manchester don't understand how hated he is by most people outside of the city centre yuppies and the various liberals , greens, lefties and BBC types in Chorlton and Didsbury. Most ordinary people here dislike him because of his low emission zone idea that floundered due to a massive opposition campaign and also his associations with Gary Neville (to whom he's just granted an investment of £16m by the Greater Manchester employees pension fund), his former nightime Czar Sacha Lord (who doesn't seem to have repaid the £400,000 that the Arts Council mistakenly awarded his company during Covid) and the various apartment developers throughout the region. Add to that his desire to grant Manchester United, a football club in terminal decline but partly owned by one of Britain's richest men, no less than £2 billion (with a b) of public funds to build a new stadium)
4 And let's not forget how few votes he got in the 2015 leadership election when he managed just 19%.
Oh, and a key person in his campaign is none other than Dogwistle Lucy.
Let's not forget just how useless this woman is. She's never had a proper job in her life. At least Rayner worked as a cleaner in the past. All this half-wit has done is work in politics and she hasn't done very well in that. She was responsible for electing Crazy Ed Moribund as Labour Leader. Remember Crazy Ed's tablet of stone on which he engraved his policies? The idea was that these were written on tablets of stone and wouldn't be broken until Dogwhistle Lucy explained that "I don't think anyone is suggesting that the fact that he's carved them into stone means that he is absolutely not going to break them or anything like that." Since she became an MP she's tried to shut down free speech and claimed that welfare cuts could start a run on the Pound. Finally, her response to a simple question if she'd seen the rape gangs documentary caused her to blurt out "Oh, we want to blow that little trumpet now, do we? Yeah, OK, let’s get that dog whistle out.” Dogwhistle Lucy. What an idiot
Dogwhistle Lucy repeatedly claims that she was born in edgy Moss Side to try and elevate her working class credentials. However, although she was born in Moss Side she certainly wasn't brought up there. Her family quickly moved to the trendy, salubrious and very leafy South Manchester suburb of Didsbury where Richard and Judy used to reside when they lived in the city. She went to both primary and secondary schools in Didsbury. As Jim Royle might have said, "Working class, my ...."
He is also mentioned as being one of the main culprits in trying to stop the Grooming & Rape Gangs enquiries. If the full truth of his involvement comes out into the public sphere he will stand no chance at the ballot box.
Great point Iris. TBH, I don't think he's got a chance at the ballot box anyway. One of his other claims to fame is that he paid his wife's company many millions to develop the low emission zone software. Another one is that when the public outcry against such a stupid and anti-poor scheme became too strong to ignore, he paid another company no less than £88 a sticker to cover up the signs warning that you would be entering the zone. £88 for every little sticker measuring 10" x 4". And he thinks he can run the country? He couldn't run a burger van.
Well, clearly YOU don't like Andy Burnham, but the evidence for his popularity across Greater Manchester is there in his three mayoral election victories.
He got 63%, 67% and 63% of the vote in 2017, 2021 and 2024 respectively.
By contrast, you tories got 22%, 19% and 17% in those elections.
So he clearly is a very popular politician.
However, much as I admire him, and voted for him as leader in both 2010 and 2015, I disagree with those who would seek to replace Keir Starmer this side of the next election.
Starmer won the Labour leadership fair and square and then became one of only four Labour leaders in our party's history (out of the 19 we've had) to win a Parliamentary majority.
So he deserves the opportunity to serve his full term.
And I think he can win again if he takes some of Paul's tips here.
Jeeze. You are correct Karl. I don't like Burnham personally because of his shady dealings and I don't like his politics either. But if you think for one minute that he's popular in Greater Manchester then you need to give your head a wobble. As I said he's popular within a certain demographic most of whom bother to vote in these elections. In the last contest, Burnham was re-elected with just 420,749 votes from an adult population of 2.5million (which includes over 100,000 students). Burnham is only liked amongst my Labour friends but I can assure you that almost everyone else despises him.
If you think Andy Burnham, or Starmer is the answer I'd advise you to amend your medication.
And once again, you clearly don't like him, OK I get that.
But he does win elections by very, very large margins. Three times he has taken more than 60% of the vote and three times you tories have taken around 20% of the vote.
There's no other evidence of popularity other than election results.
In the 2024 general election, Labour were elected on just 33.7% of the vote. In 2019, Corbyn got 32.1% of the vote and that was considered disastrous by the Blairites in the Party from Starmer to Streeting to Burnham. It gets worse. Starmer benefitted from the decline of the SNP vote and his 33.7% includes a 1.4% uplift in the Scottish vote that he got thru none of his own doing and that Corbyn didn't have the benefit of. Take that away from Starmer's 33.7% and you have 32.3% which is just 0.2% higher than Corbyn in 2019. Oh, and in 2017, Corbyn got 40%. Starmer didn't win this election. The Tories threw it away by trying to be LibDems.
It's true that Starmer, in 2024, received only a marginally larger vote share than Corbyn had achieved in 2019.
It's also true that Starmer actually received fewer votes numerically fewer votes numerically in 2024 (9,708,716) than Corbyn in 2019 (10, 268,051).
But my response to this is 'So what?'
The only thing that matters is winning or losing.
If my football team scores just one goal and wins 1-0, it's clearly a far, better result than scoring three goals but losing 3-4 isn't it?
Between now and the next election, the challenge for Labour is to be strategically intelligent, adopt some of the ideas set out by Paul here - and also build on the positive steps already taken.
Then we have every chance of winning back some of the support we may have lost to the Greens, to the likes of SNP or to the Corbyn movement.
If we can do that, and if the Reformists and Conservatives are still fighting over the right-of-centre political terrain, we could well win another majority.
I do stress the word 'could' here, because equally we may lose. But my point is I can see a potential route to victory.
It's not about winning and losing if you have a moral bone in your body (lads, I know, I know). It's about being honest with the electorate about your plans and then getting their approval for those plans by winning the election with a decent share of the popular vote.
It is not about saying one thing and doing the opposite and neither is it introducing major legalisation like ending Jury trials and digital ID without a popular mandate.
The reason for why you and they have done this is because you arrogantly believe that you are cleverer than the electorate, that you know what's good for them and they don't, so you'll tell them a pack of lies and then make them take the medicine that you've prescribed and forced down their throat.
Disgusting
Jesus Christ Almighty Karl, you really are on a different planet to the majority of the population and Labour are on the same planet. The latest polls show Labour on just 14% which is less than half of the pathetic 33.7% of the general election result just 18 months ago. Wake up and smell the coffee Karl.
Ah opinion polls.
Yes indeed, if you only look at the one polling company ('Find Out Now') which routinely scores Labour the lowest, then you'll find very low Labour indications. By contrast, 'More in Common' and 'YouGov' have Labour 6%/7% higher.
But opinion polls this far out from the next general election are pretty meaningless. In 1981, opinion polls had the then Labour leader Michael Foot at 50% and Margaret Thatcher barely above 20%. Yet the 1983 general election was a landslide Thatcher victory.
A lot can change in a couple of years.
But a lot can change even during a campaign.
Labour's Harold Wilson famously had a 12% opinion poll lead just a week before polling day in 1970. But he then lost to the Conservative Edward Heath. And in 2017, Theresa May led Jeremy Corbyn by 22% on the day she called the election, but Corbyn reduced that deficit to just 2% by election day.
Opinion polls are irrelevant to me.
I think Labour, under Starmer, have every chance of winning again - if they take some of the advice Paul offers here.
Nurse!
Here's and example of Burnham's duplicity. He claims that not a penny of public funds will go into the building of Manchester United's new stadium. What he failed to say was that £2 billion (with a B) of public funds will be required to move the RailFreight depot from Manchester to Newton-le-Willows. United need the terminal land so they can build the new stadium and keep the old one open whilst the new one is finished and if Burnham doesn't move the terminal with public funds, the new stadium won't be built.
So why doesn't the richest man in Britain who is the key shareholder in United pay for this key factor himself? Well,that's because he's got his friend Burnham who loves to hobnob with the rich and famous to persuade Starmer's corrupt Government to pay for this key aspect out of public funds.
Oh, and why Newton-le-Willows? Oh that's because Burnham grew up there and where his family and old friends live. What a hero.
Oh, oh. Burnham's hobnobbing no bounds such that a man who'd never met Mani in his life, managed to get into his funeral with Neville and Beckham. Great photo opportunity eh?
The man is a snake.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=at3TZj4VuUw
As usual Paul, you have “cut through the crap” and got to the nub of the matter, however you haven’t mentioned the increasing rise of secular politics, many spectators are expecting that Labour will take as big a kicking in the North from the Pro Gaza movement as they will from Reform UK in the South.
Personally I find this very dangerous, especially if reports of the existing Gaza MP’s not being receptive to constituents not of their diaspora.
Anyhow, I have enjoyed reading your work during 2025, and wish you and yours all the best for 2026.
A new book perchance?
In my defence, I did mention, towards the end of the piece, the rise of communal sectarianism.
The current state of British politics is worrying and depressing.
People are understandably disappointed and disillusioned with the two main parties but seem only too willing to throw their lot in with inexperienced and somewhat unrealistic outsiders, as long as they say the right thing.
Sometimes I feel we are all taking part in some giant reality show, where the novelty contestant gets the most votes!
We will have the choice of 2 proven disasters or 1 possible newbie with their hearts in favour of the interests of the UK and her people and 1 another newbie full of cranks and weirdos who have no more iea of what needs to be done to get the UK out of this mess than my cat.
Thank you Paul for your logical wisdom for the year ahead. Also, I’d like to wish you the very best 2026 has to offer and takes care of you and your family very kindly 🙏
Same to you, Hilary.
Thanks for the article Paul and this in particular...
'The government must use its massive fiscal capacity to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and public services, invest in the productive sector and deliver full employment and higher wages.'
...is absolutely spot on, as is your other key point that our government must get a grip on migration. (In my opinion, the only way to stop the small boats is to deploy the Royal Navy, humanely but firmly, to return the 'passengers' to the shore they departed from.)
I do think Labour can recover and win again - opinion polls are notoriously both unreliable and highly changeable. The Reformists and Greens may be polling well right now, but each of them will receive a brutal reality check when they discover that real politics demands hard choices.
It would be a massive mistake for Labour to seek to portray the Reformists as some kind of re-incarnation of fascism against which 'all decent people' must unite. That is a nonsense in my opinion. The best way to counter-act Reform is to consistently drum it home that it is an alternative tory party, as much a part of the wider tory family as the Conservatives and focus strongly on its neo-Thatcherite economic agenda.
'Dark blue or light blue - they're all tories' should be the key message I think.
If we can do this, as well as halting the small boats, and carrying out the fiscal policy you've set out, then Labour can win again.
Agreed. Thanks, Karl.
With literally every local council where the grooming gangs largely operated and left to inflict horrors on local girls were labour councils. Frankly I think labour is the cease pit of politics. They are a disgrace. So drumming home that reform are just an extension of the tories sure beats being the party that covered up for 1000’s of peadophiles to rape and torture underage girls for decades.
It was actually a Labour MP, Ann Cryer (Keighley), who was the first to sound the alert over this and to demand action.
As for other scandals, it was your tory PM Margaret Thatcher who gave the rapist (and staunch tory-supporting) Jimmy Saville full and unfettered access to those poor girls whom he abused.
Congratulations. You have managed to pit the victims of one sexually exploited group against another rather than having to admit that labour presided over most of the councils where the abuse took place. Saville was a monster and his victims were also let down by too many people and institutions that covered for him because he generated money for them. BBC, NHS and the Tory party. As for Ann cryer, she was treated appallingly by the Labour Party for speaking out, she was branded a racist, bullied, harassed and ostracised within the party. Maggie Oliver had to resign from the police to expose what was going on. I happen to hold the Tories with almost as much contempt because they didn’t do anything about it either. No political party owns my vote. Ideas win me over not blind ideology.
The reason I like to read Paul’s articles is because he is willing to criticise and own the failings of the Labour Party, he doesn’t hold a candle to them or make excuses for them. If more people like Paul held more sway and influence within the Labour Party I could see myself putting an X in the box. I just happen to think the current bunch in power are useless, visionless, with absolutely no principles and dangerous because they think they are really clever. But I can see your thinking. If Starmer stops a few boats and Reeves tinkers with the sums before the next election that should do it. Second term secured!
Sorry, but there are many, many examples of tories taking no action on crimes such as these.
Also, please don't take the moral high ground here as regards to politicising the issue. You raised this matter initially with respect.
Ann Cryer was the first to blow the whistle on the rape gangs but her exposes were quashed by none other than her own party who accused her of racism and Islamophobia.
Interesting that 20 years later in a town the other side of Bradford from Keighly, that a grammar school teacher lost his job and was forced into hiding for following the curriculum. With this incident, you'd think that the teaching unions, the Labour Party, the police and the Left in general would have been firmly on his side. Instead they all rounded on him and supported the Muslim protesters. Incredible.
And although Anne Cryer was the first the raise this issue, she got nowhere because Labour shut her up and it was actually Tommy Robinson who brought it back to many people's attention including who Andrew Norfolk of the Times was the first mainstream journalist to expose it.
And when he did, you know full well what happened. Those on the Left accused him of Islamophobia and racism for exposing the ritual rape, torture and kidnapping of young girls as young as 10.
You and the rest of your immoral political mates should be hanging your heads in shame.
I think it's you tories who are the immoral ones. So much damage done to our nation even more damage than the Germans did in WWII.
Also, didn't you say a couple of days ago that you had 'better things to do'?
Oh dear. Anyone who doesn't like Labour is a Tory in your eyes eh? I'm a Trot actually.
Trots and Tories are two cheeks of the same backside
😂😂😂😂 I should stay off the wine for a while cos it ain’t going to happen.
Sorry, have I stumbled onto a 'twitter' post by mistake?
Burnham’s skyscraper tycoon takes £40m dividend after taxpayer loan
Yet another article on the strange relationship between Burnham and a multi millionaire property developer from The Telegraph
A skyscraper tycoon backed by Andy Burnham took £40m in dividends from a taxpayer-backed project in Manchester, The Telegraph can reveal.
Daren Whitaker moved the money over a period of three years from WB Developments, a company backed by Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA).
It was received by another company owned by Mr Whitaker.
The disclosures, contained in Companies House filings, will heighten scrutiny of the relationship between the GMCA and Mr Whitaker, who has received more than £700m in taxpayer loans to build luxury skyscrapers in Manchester.
Under a loan agreement seen by The Telegraph, Mr Whitaker’s WB Developments was barred from paying dividends “except with the prior written consent of the lender”.
The dividends were awarded in instalments between 2017 and 2019 from WB Developments, which received £42.5m in cash from the GMCA to help build Wilburn Basin, a 491-bedroom apartment block in Salford.
The first was a £17.7m dividend in 2017, followed by £15.4m and £6.8m in payments in 2018 and 2019.
Mr Whitaker is the ultimate owner of WB Developments, according to filings on Companies House, which falls within his Renaker empire.
The payments were made despite restrictions on dividend payments contained in the initial £42.5m loan agreement between the GMCA, which is chaired by the Mayor of Greater Manchester
All very interesting. But Labour are surely screwed now as they have revealed themselves to be working for other interests and other governments - the 'British working classes' are the last people on their list. Labour (like US Democrats) can only exist by CHEATING AND LYING; they clearly hate democracy.
I think it’s a bit too early to say how things will turn out in 2026 but more people do seem to believe conflict on different fronts, both at home & abroad appears increasingly likely. The new Home Secretary has started to formulate a plan to lower migration, but will be thwarted by CS & LW MP’s, ECHR. Labour will continue to shoot themselves in the foot - “build council home for refugees” etc.
The litmus test will be in May. As with Plaid in Wales, I’d expect tactical voting to be the thing that excites the media hacks the most.
Paul, I would respectfully say that I fear you may be falling into the trap of the main stream media by getting too interested in the local government election results. Sure, Reform and the Greens will do really well at the expense of the main parties. Partly from a protest vote against the current (and previous) government and partly because they can make vague promises about local issues without talking too much about national policy objectives. This is particularly the case for the Greens, who won't have a chance in hell at the next general election when their Marxist, open boarder and environmental extremist policies are exposed in full.
I've no doubt there are people in the Labour party who would like to replace Starmer with someone who would favour their preferred policies. But there are many more that know how division is the kiss of death when in power.
As history has shown, we are just too far away from the next general election to draw any conclusions about it's outcome. I'd be interested in hearing in more detail what you would like to see to turn things around.
An interesting YouTube on Burnham and the Pakistani rape gangs. https://youtu.be/bkibvSfwgro?si=4rFy1i1_YXPRfa93