3 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

Please read and digest: https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Labour-Party-manifesto-2024.pdf

The UK has Democracy, it is a General Election every 5 years currently, or whenever the leader of the winning Party calls for another General Election, not before.

So you think it's OK to have a general election with one guy as leader, then force an MP to resign in a safe seat, bring in another guy who didn't even stand at that general election, and has totally different policies to the guy who stood as leader (but refuses to say what the policies are until he is PM), let him take the other guys seat as an MP, then force the PM to resign, and install your new guy as PM in his place without even having a leadership contest. 😄

Sounds like something that would happen in a third world banana republic. Oh... wait a minute... 😄

30 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

So you think it's OK to have a general election with one guy as leader, then force an MP to resign in a safe seat, bring in another guy who didn't even stand at that general election, and has totally different policies to the guy who stood as leader (but refuses to say what the policies are until he is PM), let him take the other guys seat as an MP, then force the PM to resign, and install your new guy as PM in his place without even having a leadership contest. 😄

Sounds like something that would happen in a third world banana republic. Oh... wait a minute... 😄

It’s absolutely OK.

The electorate do not elect the PM.

You perhaps ought to read up on how the UK Government works.

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

We should have a thread in that.

We could name it Allo Allo nice to see you.....in Dover.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Their savings and inheritance are at risk from mad socialists like Burnham.

He's going to tax the life out of anyone who has worked hard all their life to accumulate even the smallest amount of wealth, and then give it to people who sit at home all day watching Daytime TV and gaming the system. Many of whom are illegal immigrants and fake asylum seekers.

He doesn't have a clue what he's doing. Moreover, he doesn't have a mandate to do any of this.

General Election now. Just as Burnham himself called for when the Tories changed leader.

Once again Jonny, reform of social care is in the 2024 Labour Manifesto, Burnham absolutely has a mandate to reform social care.

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So it’s you who had the forum crystal ball.

A blind man could see it crystal or otherwise.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Once again Jonny, reform of social care is in the 2024 Labour Manifesto, Burnham absolutely has a mandate to reform social care.

So by definition, he has no mandate to do anything not in that manifesto?

Would you agree?

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s absolutely OK.

The electorate do not elect the PM.

You perhaps ought to read up on how the UK Government works.

It's certainly not OK.

It's not illegal.

But it's illegitimate.

24 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

So by definition, he has no mandate to do anything not in that manifesto?

Would you agree?

No I do not agree.

He has mandate to govern and deal with emerging issues.

If this were not the case it would be necessary to call an election every time an issue arose that is not included in the manifesto.

Non manifesto issues are subject to parliamentary scrutiny in both houses, manifesto promises are, by convention, passed unopposed by the House of Lords.

Refer ‘Salisbury Convention’ when you read up on how the UK Government works.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No I do not agree.

So why even mention it?

37 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Once again Jonny, reform of social care is in the 2024 Labour Manifesto, Burnham absolutely has a mandate to reform social care.

Seems you're grasping at straws due to the obvious illegitimacy of Burnham's position. 😄

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

So why even mention it?

Seems you're grasping at straws due to the obvious illegitimacy of Burnham's position. 😄

Are you having short term memory problems Jonny?

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

He doesn't have a clue what he's doing. Moreover, he doesn't have a mandate to do any of this.

And very specifically:

55 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

So by definition, he has no mandate to do anything not in that manifesto?

Would you agree?

52 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

It's certainly not OK.

It's not illegal.

But it's illegitimate.

It’s both legal and legitimate.

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You seem to have missed Burnham has not presented a social care program, it is therefore not yet a thing and so not unfunded.

His statement that he will not rule out tax increases to pay for social care is an indication that he does not intend the policy to be unfunded.

Burnham has correctly identified that social care needs urgent reform, he’s seeking cross party consensus on how to fix this urgent problem.

And incase it hasn’t dawned on you, millions of people are already paying for the failure of social care services.

Social care needs reform, Burnham is onto a winner.

Except Burnham is not seeking consensus from The Reform or Restore Parties on how to fix this urgent problem so it is a 'non starter' and so it should be. The Nation needs 'top down' reform of all government spending on Health and Social Services and further failed Marxist/Socialist policies is the last thing we need.

15 minutes ago, HK MacPhooey said:

Except Burnham is not seeking consensus from The Reform or Restore Parties on how to fix this urgent problem so it is a 'non starter' and so it should be. The Nation needs 'top down' reform of all government spending on Health and Social Services and further failed Marxist/Socialist policies is the last thing we need.

Reform have 7 MPs, Restore has 1.

That’s your none starter right there.

Correction Reform have 6 MPs.

Edited July 30Jul 30 by Chomper Higgot

21 minutes ago, HK MacPhooey said:

Except Burnham is not seeking consensus from The Reform or Restore Parties on how to fix this urgent problem so it is a 'non starter' and so it should be. The Nation needs 'top down' reform of all government spending on Health and Social Services and further failed Marxist/Socialist policies is the last thing we need.

The Reform 7 MP's and Restore Parties 1 MP in the UK Government, 1.23% of 650 MP's, hardly anything more than a blot on the landscape.

Yes, there does need to be a reform of the Health and Social Services departments after 14 years of Tory mismanagement.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

So you think it's OK to have a general election with one guy as leader, then force an MP to resign in a safe seat, bring in another guy who didn't even stand at that general election, and has totally different policies to the guy who stood as leader (but refuses to say what the policies are until he is PM), let him take the other guys seat as an MP, then force the PM to resign, and install your new guy as PM in his place without even having a leadership contest. 😄

Sounds like something that would happen in a third world banana republic. Oh... wait a minute... 😄

Is there a question in there somewhere?

As Winston Churchill defined democracy as "the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

While democracy has flaws, it remains the best option compared to other systems, until the rules are change by a future UK Parliament, suck it up.