JCS

@David__Osland @CHRISTI55253213 Time to call their bluff - he can choose to stay or go without any incentive offered but maybe try the opposite and give him a target to hit in order to get his salary - maybe a bit less shit in our waterways?

Water companies have been banned from paying bonuses. So Anglian Water has given its chief executive a £1.3m 'retention payment' instead. I would accuse them of taking the piss, but they're dumping most of that into the River Ouse.

@charlotteukcity What skills and relevant experience does Streeting have to be defence secretary commanding the respect of the services and overseas counterparts at this critical time - NONE

I’m hearing Wes Streeting is being tipped for a big defence job for this country. That fills me with horror. As someone with a sister in the NHS, I can tell you even they were not happy with Wes. Keeping this country safe requires a qualified person carefully chosen.

@dave43law Arrogant or deluded he does not bring hope but populism, trite soundbites and media performances - competence and decency he has not

New Labour leader Andy Burnham says he's 'ready to lead' and give Britain 'hope back' mirror.co.uk/news/politics/…

@PeterStefanovi2 You, Burnham have won a by election in Makerfield that's all - so get over your own self-believed wonderfulness and maybe talk reality instead of soundbites and tosh - huuurp in every haaaart - don't cut it

"As your leader I will set a direction that is distinctively Labour," Andy Burnham says "We win by being us," the new Labour leader adds👏

@PolitlcsUK Burnham the dim but media savvy performer adding insult to fury about his traitorous plot to oust KS - he evidently thinks we're all thick

🚨 WATCH: Andy Burnham says he wasn’t involved in ousting Keir Starmer

@GordonFielden Our democracy would appear to have changed into a popularity contest organised and drafted by our right wing MSM - Burnham a gift to them having none of the serious competence or integrity of Starmer

Andy Burnham's Premiership Begins with One Unanswered Question Few politicians have travelled from the political sidelines to Number 10 as quickly as Andy Burnham. Yet it is not the speed of his ascent that should concern the country, but the remarkable absence of public scrutiny that has accompanied it. In the space of a few weeks, Mr Burnham has returned to Parliament through a by election, become Leader of the Labour Party and now assumes the office of Prime Minister. Such a remarkable political rise would ordinarily be accompanied by intense public debate, a detailed leadership campaign and rigorous examination of the programme upon which the incoming Prime Minister intends to govern. Instead, the country has been presented with broad aspirations but remarkably little substance. His first speech as Labour leader promises a new direction for Britain, growth in every postcode, greater power for local communities and a distinctly Labour programme. These are attractive political aspirations, but they are not a programme for government. There remains very little explanation of how these ambitions will be delivered, how they will be financed or how success will ultimately be judged. It is extraordinary that a politician can become Prime Minister without first presenting a detailed programme for government to either Labour's membership or the British people. There has been no contested leadership campaign, no sustained examination of competing ideas, no opportunity for members to test his vision and no meaningful national debate about the policies he now intends to pursue from Number 10. Instead, the electorate is simply being asked to trust that the detail will follow. Equally significant is the manner in which Mr Burnham secured the Labour leadership. Whilst the Parliamentary Labour Party acted within the party's constitutional framework, the process bears all the hallmarks, in my opinion, of having been carefully managed to ensure that no genuine leadership contest ever emerged. By rapidly consolidating parliamentary support behind a single candidate, the Parliamentary Labour Party ensured there would be no meaningful choice for Labour's membership and no opportunity for ordinary members to decide who should lead their party. A process may comply with the written rules whilst still raising legitimate political questions about whether it reflects the democratic spirit those rules were intended to uphold. Hundreds of thousands of Labour members found themselves watching events unfold rather than participating in them. The leadership was effectively settled before they were ever invited to express a view. The consequences extend well beyond the Labour Party itself. Andy Burnham now assumes the office of Prime Minister without having presented a detailed programme for government to either his own party or the British electorate. Constitutionally, that is permissible. Politically, however, it presents a very different challenge. Leadership in a parliamentary democracy may be determined in Westminster, but lasting political authority depends upon public confidence. It is this that may become the defining weakness of Mr Burnham's premiership. In my judgement, the Parliamentary Labour Party manufactured a process that ensured its preferred candidate reached the leadership without ever having to submit himself to a genuine contest before Labour's membership. That may satisfy Westminster, but it is unlikely to satisfy many Labour members or many voters across the country. Far from healing divisions within Labour, this process risks creating a deeper divide between the Parliamentary Labour Party and the grassroots membership who were denied any meaningful voice in choosing their leader. Nor is that divide confined to Labour alone. It extends into the wider electorate, many of whom will inevitably ask why the country now has a Prime Minister whose programme for Britain has never been subjected to a contested leadership election, never fully scrutinised by Labour's membership and never tested before the British people. If Andy Burnham wishes to remove those questions once and for all, there is only one convincing course available to him. He should seek his own mandate from the British people on the basis of his own programme for government. Only then will the electorate have the opportunity to judge not merely the man, but the vision he now asks the country to embrace. In my judgement, it is unrealistic to believe that Mr Burnham can simply govern until the scheduled General Election in July 2029 without these questions becoming increasingly significant. The issue of political legitimacy, the absence of a contested leadership election, the lack of a direct mandate from Labour's membership and the absence of meaningful public scrutiny of his programme are unlikely simply to disappear with the passage of time. For that reason, I believe the pressure upon Mr Burnham to seek an earlier mandate from the British people will grow rather than diminish. If he wishes to establish an undisputed political authority of his own, rather than merely inherit office through parliamentary process, he may ultimately conclude that there is no substitute for asking the electorate directly for its confidence. Whether one supports or opposes Andy Burnham politically is, in many respects, beside the point. The issue is far larger than one individual. It concerns the standards of democratic accountability that the British public should expect of anyone who seeks to occupy the highest office in the land. A Prime Minister should not simply inherit power. He should demonstrate his vision, defend his programme and earn the confidence of those he seeks to govern. bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…

@richardosefton @dave43law He's beyond parody with his shouting down interviewers and talking absolute drivel non stop that we all know bears no resemblance to truth or logic

@dave43law Jenrick wants the top job so bad

The £5million is not the story now - that is being dealt with The real questions that should be being asked at this time - who is 'leaking' from Reform? - what is their motivation? - is unelected Yusuf involved - he seemed pretty confident in himself in the hour or so faux outrage broadcast yesterday - he was slow to Farage's defence when all the stories broke too - as Jenrick is under police investigation , Tice is involved in investigation in to donations and Farage flees from scrutiny - Does Yusuf see the time as now?

@donmcgowan The point in the Burnham takeover seems to be promoting the leading conspirators into senior posts with influence they didn't have from Starmer and believed they deserved - traitors, plotters and self-interested liars

And the rigmarole begins. The media and some well-placed leaks from the Labour backbenches are already undermining the new leader … before he's even started. I hate to say I told you so, but I informed you thusly. What was the point in the Burnham takeover?

@WordMercenary @CHRISTI55253213 So why do the perpetrators and recipients continue to have their freedom and continue to make inordinate amounts of money - it needs to end

"Accidentally" giving £10billion of government money to companies owned by your mates isn't "waste", it's fraud.

@dave43law They can ensure they follow their beliefs by never taking the chance they may impregnate those whose decision making on abortion and their own body legally prevails

There you go ladies They seem to know what is best

@thenorth4theeu @CliveWismayer New Labour prepared for a pandemic at the time of swine 'flu even purchasing stocks of anti viral drugs - Tories let it all expire to become useless - huge corruption opportunities ensued when covid hit

@CliveWismayer NHS staff believed everything needed for a pandemic was ready to go. I believe it was under New Labour, but wasn't maintained because of austerity by the Tories. They were shocked when they had to buy their own stuff from Amazon, appeal for members of the public to make it etc.

NHS staff died for want of PPE. Died.

@PaulBasnett @eyejosh @ShoaibMKhan @2ears2wheels @michaelgove Burnham could begin to redeem his dishonest plot to bring down a decent competent PM by taking legal action against the perpetrators and recipients of £10bn of covid corrupt contracts

@ShoaibMKhan @2ears2wheels @michaelgove Yes and purely coincidental that £10bn went out to the "right" type of people while actual UK suppliers were ignored. That kind of incompetence seems like corruption and cronyism

So @michaelgove has repeatedly proudly announced that "Dame Heather Hallet found *no* evidence of cronyism or corruption on the part of ministers or officials". This is what the report says. What is this then? How do our leaders define cronyism?

@infieldg @ValDobson @grok Most other women do not have the platform she does to trumpet her beliefs and expectation that her wealth makes her more entitled to be heard

@ValDobson @grok why does J. K. Rowling get more hate than males for the same opposition to trans gender demands? It's so extreme they even created an app to dox anyone who bought the Hogwarts game - I literally bought the game for that reason, I've never played it.

JK Rowling and Ricky Gervaise. Both are mega-millionaire celebrities, both give most of their money away, both refuse to believe that people can change sex and are very vocal about it. Only one of them gets inundated with thousands of death/rape threats and has had to employ tight security as a result. Gosh, I wonder what the difference is? It's a mystery...

@DrNeilStone @adamboultonTABB Maybe he's trying to reduce the population in a different way to Trump's ICE

Shuts down Ebola research - Massive Ebola outbreak Closes CDC Parasitic disease division - Huge parasitic diarrhoea outbreak Defunds screwworm research - screwworm comes back to the US Ladies and gentlemen I give you Health Secretary RFK Jr

@dave43law Surely the stabilisation had to come before the transformation - so 2 years in ousted because the second phase wasn't completed yet ?

Burnham must learn from Starmer’s mistakes: Labour was elected to transform the economy, not just stabilise it theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

@ThierryBreton @mikegalsworthy @elonmusk @UnderSecPD You may not gave noticed but Elon Musk is not a French citizen so as a foreigner has no right or place to "back" Marine Le Pen - financially or as a voter

Season of political interference begins. So @elonmusk is backing Marine Le Pen. That’s his right. It’s now up to the authorities to ensure X’s algorithm in Europe doesn’t favor any candidate. The rule of law applies to everyone. No exceptions.

@DrSteveTaylor NHS accredited PPE and medical equipment suppliers were ignored as £bn's in contracts for PPE and other supplies went to Tory donors and friends- blatant corruption and theft and still they get away with it

Covid contracts £47.8bn Test & Trace the biggest cost £32bn 3x the annual cost of GP provision GPs had names, addresses, contact numbers, buildings, test facilities yet weren’t even considered or consulted Govt continues to ignore possibilities & wastes resources

@Real_Sean_Brady @Eyeswideopen69 This is the bloke who has a track record of inciting riots and violence against asylum seekers - and most of his claims of security issues don't stand up to scrutiny

I think he needs to pick a lane. Are online hurty words bad or not? After all, he platformed someone who incited others to burn people alive at his party conference.

@PrfChrisPainter @MHartleyJones He had powerful malign forces against him from the get go - the far right £billionaire owners of our MSM and his own lying hypocritical traitorous cabinet and MPs - never stood a chance

Very moving. A political journey that should still have had some way to go.

@andyburnham Well the majority of us Labour party members ARE NOT behind you - we don't buy into non democratic traitorous ousting of a decent competent PM

Good luck lads We’re all behind you 💪🏻