Andy Burnham | Manchester Mayor

Blue Mist said:
Ok here is a question for you.
Is the regeneration of the Trafford area dependent on the rags getting a new stadium ?

I'll answer my own question. No it's not. I am all for Burnham pushing which ever party is in power for funding of the houses and such like. The government, whether local or national should not be spending one penny to assist multi billionaire tax exiles get a new stadium which will simply make the multi billionaires richer.
Click to expand...
Without the new Old Trafford revenue driver at the centre of this project central government won't spend the money, it's as simple as that. So Burnham is right to take whatever he can, regardless of the merits or otherwise of this dodgy bollocks.
 
The perfect fumble said:
Without the new Old Trafford revenue driver at the centre of this project central government won't spend the money, it's as simple as that. So Burnham is right to take whatever he can, regardless of the merits or otherwise of this dodgy bollocks.
Click to expand...
If you ignore the hype and bullshit, how are the rags going to generate much more revenue than they do now?
 
BTH said:
So which hero did you vote for in last year's GM Mayoral Election?
Click to expand...
That question swerves the point I made.
It is very easy to say what the government should not do. It is far harder to offer a practical solution.
We have immigrants arriving daily, some genuine asylum seekers, some simply looking for a better life.
Once they arrive here we have a duty of care.
As an elected politician I expect him to offer a sensible alternative to the scheme he is opposing.
 
The perfect fumble said:
I've no idea, the foundations of this project are wobblier than a Toon beer belly.
Click to expand...
That's my point. The whole premise of the Trafford Council regeneration project centres around the houses and the business's. I know because I asked my Local MP. Yes he'd like the rags to have a new tent (not his exact words) but IF that happens they are paying for it. What he wants and Trafford Council want is the money for that project and will look to do it with or without the rags.
This is why I don't understand the Burnham bluster. Who is paying Seb Coe ? (My fault for not asking at the time) but as I understand it, Trafford ain't.
 
Blue Mist said:
That question swerves the point I made.
It is very easy to say what the government should not do. It is far harder to offer a practical solution.
We have immigrants arriving daily, some genuine asylum seekers, some simply looking for a better life.
Once they arrive here we have a duty of care.
As an elected politician I expect him to offer a sensible alternative to the scheme he is opposing.
Click to expand...
So who did YOU vote for?
It's a simple enough question...
 
BTH said:
So who did YOU vote for?
It's a simple enough question...
Click to expand...
The reason you go into a booth is so that your vote is secret.
If I were to answer that by saying Conservative you would mo doubt lecture me on their faults, failures and corrupt governance.
If I said the Greens I would told I'd wasted my vote and if I said Burnham you would berate me for now having a go at someone I helped put in power.
I may have voted for Nick Buckley but if I admitted that I may face more bm posters wrath as well as yours. ;-)

Where would you house the migrants?
It's a simple enough question.
 
Last edited:
Blue Mist said:
The reason you go into a booth is so that your vote is secret.
If I were to answer that by saying Conservative you would mo doubt lecture me on their faults, failures and corrupt governance.
If I said the Greens I would told I'd wasted my vote and if I said Burnham you would berate me for now having a go at someone I helped put in power.
I may have voted for Nick Buckley but if I admitted that I may face more bm posters wrath as well as yours. ;-)

Where would you house the migrants?
It's a simple enough question.
Click to expand...
In army bases until they were all approved and then chipped
 
city2 said:
In army bases until they were all approved and then chipped
Click to expand...
If bases are available that is the obvious solution.
My point was Burnham jumped on the bandwagon and demands the hotels be closed but he did not provide one alternative solution.
He is in a far better position than you or me to name somewhere they could go, but he didn't.
 
Blue Mist said:
The reason you go into a booth is so that your vote is secret.
If I were to answer that by saying Conservative you would mo doubt lecture me on their faults, failures and corrupt governance.
If I said the Greens I would told I'd wasted my vote and if I said Burnham you would berate me for now having a go at someone I helped put in power.
I may have voted for Nick Buckley but if I admitted that I may face more bm posters wrath as well as yours. ;-)

Where would you house the migrants?
It's a simple enough question.
Click to expand...
Ah, the old answering a question with a question trick!
 
BTH said:
Ah, the old answering a question with a question trick!
Click to expand...
:-)

If you must know. The Green candidate. Perhaps not my usual choice and perhaps a little bit a protest vote. Burnham to me is selfish, it's all about him. I know you are very politically active, I'm not. It's how I see the man and of course I could be wrong.

Edit: perhaps badly worded. In relation to the world and the way we are ruining it, I agree with the Green Party, politically I think they are all over the show.
 
Contrasting Starmer and Burnham in my mind says that Burnham wins on the one key factor playing major in today's politics - he's a far better communicator.
I'm not saying I agree with Burnham's policies as I don't know what they are, other than the emissions zone and his declared support for New Trafford (spit).
Burnham explains policy with passion, not something that Starmer does. Maybe only 2 or 3 times have I ever heard him speak with passion.

It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with policies, the general electorate don't really care for the detail, just the one who sounds and looks best.
Think of Blair and Major or Cameron and Gordon Brown as examples.

The days of the PM setting policy are long gone, they are expected to be presenting on camera in front of a podium, flying to international meetings, speaking to the press, opening village fetes, etc.
PM analysing options, chairing the cabinet and deciding policy died with the Heath, Wilson, Callghan era.
Thatcher (spit) had the likes of Keith Joseph setting out the details of monetary policy and the steal privatisation of public assets. But she communicated so well that it was her policy such that the whole ethos took her name.

The turgid performance of Starmer as leader suggests to me that new leadership is needed. I can't see an obvious electable candidate in the picture.
I can see that Burnham winning a safe by-election and entering parliament, is a route to him becoming leader/PM within the next year, like it or not.
 
pride in battle said:
Who was that ? (Not AB obviously)
Click to expand...

its the Japanese Ambassador to the Court of St James - really interesting guy who I follow on line. Loves the UK - travels everywhere with a Paddington Bear, loves a pint ( as you can see ) loves a cream tea, went to Uni here and goes by the name of Hiroshi Suzuki.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top