'We want an election now!' Burnham faces mandate backlash before entering No. 10

Andy Burnham will walk into Downing Street on Monday under growing pressure to seek a general election, after a new poll found almost half of voters believe he has no mandate to push through his sweeping left-wing agenda.

The incoming Prime Minister has promised the biggest political reset in decades, but critics say Britain's next leader has been "crowned, not chosen" by the public.

Poll shows demand for a public vote

An exclusive Find Out Now poll for the Mail on Sunday found that 47% of voters believe Burnham should call a general election, compared with 31% who believe he should not.

The findings are likely to intensify questions over Burnham's legitimacy after he replaced Sir Keir Starmer through an internal Labour leadership process rather than a nationwide election.

One senior Labour MP admitted the issue could become impossible to ignore.

"He hasn't got a mandate. You can't promise the biggest change in history and not have a mandate."

Ambitious plans face immediate resistance

Burnham has pledged a radical programme that includes:

• Expanding public ownership of utilities.

• Building a new generation of council homes.

• Reforming social care.

• Cutting energy bills and bus fares.

• Introducing wealth taxes on Britain's richest households.

He has also argued Britain took "wrong turns" during the Thatcher era and wants to reverse decades of economic policy.

But voters appear sceptical about how those promises should be funded.

The same poll found only 18% support raising taxes to repair the public finances, while 55% favour cutting public spending instead.

Cabinet chaos overshadows first days

Even before taking office, Labour is facing accusations of confusion over senior ministerial appointments.

Shabana Mahmood is reportedly edging ahead of Ed Miliband in the race to become Chancellor, despite many on Labour's left expecting Miliband to receive the Treasury brief.

Other reports suggest:

• Wes Streeting could move to Defence, Health or even the Treasury.

• Angela Rayner is being considered for Health Secretary.

• David Miliband has even been linked with a return to frontline politics as Foreign Secretary.

One veteran Labour MP joked:

"Everyone's so much in the dark that they keep bumping into each other."

North Sea U-turn?

One of Burnham's first major policy shifts could be approving new North Sea oil and gas drilling in response to energy pressures created by the war with Iran.

Such a move would represent a significant departure from Labour's previous Net Zero stance and could place him on a collision course with environmental campaigners and some members of his own party.

Conservatives smell weakness

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accused Burnham of avoiding scrutiny by taking office while Parliament is in recess.

She dismissed his early rhetoric as lacking substance, saying voters still have little idea how he intends to deliver his ambitious promises.

The Conservatives have also branded Burnham the "coronation chicken", claiming he is avoiding immediate questioning in the House of Commons.

Pressure building inside Labour

Some Labour MPs are already warning that Burnham may eventually have little choice but to seek his own electoral mandate.

Veteran MP Graham Stringer argued that if Burnham intends to deliver reforms on the scale he has promised, the public should first be given the opportunity to endorse them at the ballot box.

His warning summed up the growing dilemma facing the new Prime Minister.

"You cannot unify the party on a blank cheque. You cannot take people with you if you do not tell them where they are going."

With Downing Street beckoning and expectations soaring, Burnham's honeymoon could prove remarkably short if questions over his democratic mandate continue to overshadow the start of his premiership.

SOURCE

There was a vote at the general election.

The people have spoken.

Burnham didn't stand in the general election.

Would you be OK with Hitler being appointed PM by the Labour party as PM?

Might be a good way to get an unelectable person as PM.

Why not Khan for PM?

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by BritManToo

Weak. Illigitimate. Commie toerag. You can see why team woke are having raptures.

I do wonder where the "no kings" gaggle of flouncers are these days? crickets.....

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Burnham didn't stand in the general election.

Would you be OK with Hitler being appointed PM by the Labour party as PM?

Might be a good way to get an unelectable person as PM.

Why not Khan for PM?

How did Hitler get into this, he’s dead so not ever going to be PM, or are you being a tad irrational?

3 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Weak. Illigitimate. Commie toerag. You can see why team woke are having raptures.

I do wonder where the "no kings" gaggle of flouncers are these days? crickets.....

Burnham is not a Communist, the UK already has a King.

Inserting the term ‘woke’ into your post did not improve the nonsense that it is.

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Why not Khan for PM?

Why not? Another successful Mayor, re-elected twice.

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

How did Hitler get into this, he’s dead so not ever going to be PM, or are you being a tad irrational?

Is that a rhetorical question?

I believe in a UK election citizens vote for their local MP. The party with the most MP's in parliament then forms a government. The leader of that party is de facto Prime Minister. If he/she/it dies or resigns then the party chooses another leader.

So the electorate do not directly vote for a Prime Minister.

3 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

I believe in a UK election citizens vote for their local MP. The party with the most MP's in parliament then forms a government. The leader of that party is de facto Prime Minister. If he/she/it dies or resigns then the party chooses another leader.

So the electorate do not directly vote for a Prime Minister.

Yeah, but Nigel says...

20 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Burnham didn't stand in the general election.

Would you be OK with Hitler being appointed PM by the Labour party as PM?

Might be a good way to get an unelectable person as PM.

Why not Khan for PM?

Whether it is a general election, or a byelection, the elected MP has the same mandate. The party or coalition with the most MPs forms the government. The former PM was not elected by the "people', but was selected by his party's delegates. The new PM has been selected in the same way. Nothing has changed except the selection of a new MP.

Labour received 33.7% of the votes in the last election. Hardly, a strong endorsement, nor much of a mandate. However, Labor won a majority of seats and a mandate to govern of 5 years. Nothing has changed. The mandate continues.

The voters made their choice in 2024. Now they must accept the consequences of their poor choice. Next time, people who want to punish a political party will consider that they may instead be punishing themselves. Labour still retains a united and strong core support from the unions, the people who do well from the welfare state, youth and students and the migrant community. They aren't going to resign and give up an opportunity to push their brand of socialism.

3 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

I believe in a UK election citizens vote for their local MP. The party with the most MP's in parliament then forms a government. The leader of that party is de facto Prime Minister. If he/she/it dies or resigns then the party chooses another leader.

So the electorate do not directly vote for a Prime Minister.

Whilst that is true we do not directly vote for a Prime Minister it does influence some voters in what party they vote for which is why I for instance would never vote for a Conservative candidate as long as that Nigerian cow is leader.

It doesn't make sense to have an election before anything has been implemented. The Prime Minister is always the leader of the party with a majority. No one voted for the Minister of Defence, the Minister of Health, the Home Secretary etc., but calling for their election to those positions by the public hardly makes sense.

I do agree that after Burnham has shown his policies in action he could call a snap election but why spend more now?

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There was a vote at the general election.

The people have spoken.

Not for Burnham there wasnt. The moron who held the position went back on just about everything they had in their manifesto as well

34 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Labour still retains a united and strong core support from the unions, the people who do well from the welfare state, youth and students and the migrant community. They aren't going to resign and give up an opportunity to push their brand of socialism.

For which we remain eternally grateful.

24 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

The moron who held the position went back on just about everything they had in their manifesto as well

Who are you referring to?

52 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

I believe in a UK election citizens vote for their local MP. The party with the most MP's in parliament then forms a government. The leader of that party is de facto Prime Minister. If he/she/it dies or resigns then the party chooses another leader.

So the electorate do not directly vote for a Prime Minister.

The vote on the content of a party's manifesto, not the leader.

This new leader is claiming on one hand to stick with that manifesto and on the other hand wants to take the country back to the 1970's labour manifestos along with full nationalisation etc. The labour party were not elected to do that at the last general election.

A new GE is therefore essential as he has no mandate for his proposed changes!

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by scottiejohn

Guess what?

Britain never got a Constitution either.

That organized, planned Democracy must look pretty good right about now. 🥳

47 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Not for Burnham there wasnt. The moron who held the position went back on just about everything they had in their manifesto as well

22 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Who are you referring to?

Starmer for one then Burnham who refused to have an inquiry into the grooming gangs. Burnham is not fit for purpose.

10 minutes ago, SiSePuede419 said:

Guess what?

Britain never got a Constitution either.

That organized, planned Democracy must look pretty good right about now. 🥳

But we do have Maggy Carter.

I remember the king at the time was not best pleased and he told me being first bowman to the king at the time that if anyone knocked on his door waving that piece of paper around I was to stick an arrow up their jacksy

13 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Starmer for one then Burnham who refused to have an inquiry into the grooming gangs. Burnham is not fit for purpose.

Let’s have a link to support your claim Burnham refused to have an inquiry into grooming gangs.

1 hour ago, Bannoi said:

Whilst that is true we do not directly vote for a Prime Minister it does influence some voters in what party they vote for which is why I for instance would never vote for a Conservative candidate as long as that Nigerian cow is leader.

Does your bovinophobia extend across Friesians, Guernseys and Highlands as well?

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

Whether it is a general election, or a byelection, the elected MP has the same mandate. The party or coalition with the most MPs forms the government. The former PM was not elected by the "people', but was selected by his party's delegates. The new PM has been selected in the same way. Nothing has changed except the selection of a new MP.

Labour received 33.7% of the votes in the last election. Hardly, a strong endorsement, nor much of a mandate. However, Labor won a majority of seats and a mandate to govern of 5 years. Nothing has changed. The mandate continues.

The voters made their choice in 2024. Now they must accept the consequences of their poor choice. Next time, people who want to punish a political party will consider that they may instead be punishing themselves. Labour still retains a united and strong core support from the unions, the people who do well from the welfare state, youth and students and the migrant community. They aren't going to resign and give up an opportunity to push their brand of socialism.

I'm sure those who spitefully cast their protest vote have learned their lesson and wont be doing anything like that again anytime soon. Likewise many dyed in the wool lifelong labour voted must realise that inline with Starmers slogan once again "it time for change" they wont be fooled by Burnham and will never vote Labour again

It's clear that the entire country is screaming to get rid of the current gang of clowns, if they had one shred of decency,and for the good of the country, they would hang their heads in shame , admit that they never deserved to be in government, apologise for the damage they have caused , and then do the decent thing and call a general election.

Allowing Nigel to take control as soon as possible, is the best thing they could do, for the country they claim to care for

I think they are finished , even if Burnham manages to cling on to the end they have lost credibility and will never be voted in for the next 20 years at least. Thats how long it will take to forget this nighmare

Journalist & Broadcaster Sonia Poulton talks with journalist Jody McIntyre about his research on incoming Prime Minister, Andy Burnham.

Unelected and will never be legitimate.
Burnham was 'parachuted' into a cast-iron Labour seat the same way Starmer was after his uncanny rise-without-trace (appointed to the most senior position in the judiciary then knighted at a time when most people had never heard of him).

People need to be asking who the puppeteers are, who actually made the decisions, and why, to confer all this on such an utterly unremarkable man. Hence the above video.

52 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Does your bovinophobia extend across Friesians, Guernseys and Highlands as well?

On the contrary I absolutely love Jerseys stare into their eyes and you instantly fall in love with them.

Though Ive always found them a bit sloppy.

The system is what it is. The PM is the leader of the party that won the most seats. He's not a president or an individual that is voted for separately by the electorate. Hence the governing party simply chooses a new leader and he/she becomes governing party leader and PM. You'll get a chance to choose again - in 3 years, when the current (very strong majority) government calls an election. The departure of a party leader doesn't nullify the last general election. Absurd ideas.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by ronnie50

3 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Would you be OK with Hitler being appointed PM by the Labour party as PM?

Good idea. Vote for the Dead, then you know what to expect.

Give the boy some credits (Burnham)

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There was a vote at the general election.

The people have spoken.

There has been no countrywide vote in favour of Burnham. The "people" have yet to speak on this.

The last GE was a rejection of the Conservatives far more than any endorsement of Starmer (33.7%).

Burnham was not even standing for Parliament.

We've just been shunted from Two-Tier Kier over to Back Door Burnham.

So, with that in mind, I think we're probably be in even deeper poo!

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

Who are you referring to?

Starmer.