Big pronouncements

Targeted benefits are a huge challenge - the systems for deciding the targeting can cost more than they save.

*Burnham and his merry band of cronies. Have still not said anything about economic growth, or rising, unemployment and tackling the ever growing welfare state costs.
Not to mention Social Care and the NHS* - they are not a merry band of cronies - they are the cabinet!

And they have not had 48 hours yet - give them a chance!!

Oreo

WFA was too targeted as those just above the line lost out and they were poor too, like my own Mum.
It was a big political mistake by KS and RR.

Abolishing WFA was a major political mistake but it was and is in need of reform equitably. It’s completely unfair and ridiculous in who does and doesn’t qualify. Couples in particular do very well out of it

As regards Manchester, there is a history - I lived there when years of feminist action resulted in the Equal Opportunities Committee on 16th July 1984. I remember visiting....

So I was cross checking further and came across this reminder

www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/what-we-do/equalities/independent-inequalities-commission/

Burnham was amongst those who set up not just this commission but even more significantly

The Greater Manchester Race Equality Panel was formed in December 2020 as a result..

(But the national Equality and Human Rights Commission -EHRC has had its headquarters/offices in Manchester since its creation in 2007. And I suspect the Womens Equality Commission spawned these Manchester settings.

Hear hear. It's been in the grip of London far too long.

I think decentralisation is a very good idea. It means that relevant government departments can be nearer to those they serve.
Savings can be made on estate costs in London, and a wider talent pool of employees, rather than mainly drawn from the south east.

Burnham and his merry band of cronies. Have still not said anything about economic growth, or rising, unemployment and tackling the ever growing welfare state costs.
Not to mention Social Care and the NHS

Never mind the ever growing problems around immigration and guaranteed job losses due to AI

Basically, because they have no ideas or policies. Just empty promises And are too weak to stand up to the real causes of these problems and sort them out.

Or they will more importantly, lose voters. Which is really the only real game in town. And always has been to stay in power.

As for his Manchesterisms. Well he kind of did take the buses back into public ownership. Spent a fortune on painting them yellow as part of the Bee Network.

Services has not improved. Some may say actually got worse.

As for regional.govrnment.Never going to happen in England.

And the Downing Street of the North? This is the best joke l have heard all week. Publicity hang over from George Osbourne's Great Northern Powerhouse.

The VAT cut is a nice gesture but will end up doing little to help people because …

Martin Lewis: I’ve just got the latest energy bill predictions. The average of 3 sources show the Price Cap rising 5.1% on 1 Oct - as the last week has seen very high wholesale rates. An annualised rise of £93 on a typical bill.

Blame the warmongers for that.

Whitewavemark2

What Burnham has done today imo is to “signal” the direction of travel, and in the process indicating to the struggling that help will indeed be coming - although probably in the longer rather than shorter term. But we shall see.

I do agree with is, in other words gesture politics.

WFA was too targeted as those just above the line lost out and they were poor too, like my own Mum.
It was a big political mistake by KS and RR.

That’s because you know nothing about me Tuliptree and I don’t have you ‘down’ as anything at all.

Oreo

I prefer money to go to those who need it.

I didn’t have you down as someone in support of abolishing WFA except for those on pension credit. Interesting

I prefer money to go to those who need it.

It’s obviously just gesture politics, it’s non targeted so everyone will get it.

Only people with enough income dismiss any extra help no matter how little.

Luckygirl3

£45 is a lot of money to someone on benefits.

It’s that amount over 6 months.
I think if it had been targeted to the poorest it could have been a lot more.
May well have been too difficult to be a targeted amount, so tbh I wonder if it’s worth doing at all.

Thank you GrannyGravy, I thought it was only 3 months but knew it wasn't for a year.

They did point out that scrapping ID cards was meaningless economically given that the money hadn’t been allocated for it anyway. I hadn’t looked at it that way and had assumed that Darren Jones was being critical of the Starmer government and, in fact, it was the opposite. Which surprised me due to his loyalty to Keir. They also said that after his last resignation speech Keir went to the pub with his mates. Good for him .

I haven’t listened to trip yet - must do later this evening.

According to TRIP scrapping VAT on energy was one of the things vote leave promised if we left the EU but then never did ( I should have remembered this as Gisela Stewart did a Q&A on here and promised just that and I moaned about it for years afterwards until it was overshadowed by even more things to moan about).

£45 is a lot of money to someone on benefits.

What Burnham has done today imo is to “signal” the direction of travel, and in the process indicating to the struggling that help will indeed be coming - although probably in the longer rather than shorter term. But we shall see.

Interesting piece from Anna Macdonald Investment Strategy Director at Hargreave Lansdowne:

The Case for a National Security Bond - With the Defence Investment Plan increasing spending, could the UK issue a national security bond to fill a budget blackhole? We explore the idea, its history, and what it means for investors.

www.hl.co.uk/news/could-defence-bonds-help-fund-britains-rising-military-costs

Appointing former Defence Secretary John Healey as the new Chancellor makes a lot of sense to me if this is to be explored.

I am a private landlord, a so called 'accidental' landlord as I just have one house. I am a good and social landlord.

The current government is attacking private landlords and forcing many of us to sell. Who will buy those houses? Not the tenants for sure but banks and big investors.
Not good for renters.
Weed out the crap landlords by all means, but deliberately destroying the sector is criminal.
So his Burnham's mealy words don't impress me.
I am very, very and . And I wont vote for either party again.

A National Recovery ISA is a great idea, David. If Burnham's people are reading this, I hope they take it on board.

And agreed, Wyllow. I'll never forgive Thatcher for that, or for the many other ways she ruined so many lives.