So Burnham says he is sticking to the manifesto which won Labour the last election.
So whatâs the point of changing PM then?
So Burnham says he is sticking to the manifesto which won Labour the last election.
So whatâs the point of changing PM then?
The Tories had three different PMs in the last Parliament and two in the Parliament before that.
Didnât the Romans have the Senate?
![]()
you need to go back further to Greece for the birthplace of democracy
Britain is considered by any fair minded student of history as the birthplace of modern democracy
and thats why democracy is dead there, its also the reason their PMs lack fibre - they simply have not been mandated by the electorate
Burnhams rise to 10 was the most egregious of the recent failures
Iâd say Truss and Sunak were worse.
I guess Truss and Sunak were already MPs and had been in cabinet.
Engineering a by-election and parachuting in a guy who didnât contest the last election seems different.
What does it say about the 400 or so Labour MPs that they need to bring in Burnham like that?
Liz at least provided us with a laugh
He still had to go and win it tbf.
He did, but itâs been a Labour seat since the constituency was first setup in 1983.
Yes he has a recent mandate.
Sky News suggesting he has avoided scrutiny since basically becoming the defacto next PM a month ago.
Reeves and Lammy gone.
John Healey as new Chancellor is a surprise.
Centrist solution. Milliband or Mahmood would piss the other side off.
If yer man Count Binface wins the Clacton by election will he take his seat in Parliament and will he wear his full bin regalia?
Moving Miliband out of Energy a shrewd move too.
I would love if he won.
Well itâs a one horse race due to the lack of talent and courage of both the conservatives and labour
Ange is back at the top table.