Prospero #NotFarWrong

If you have pronouns in your profile, don't expect anything you say to be taken seriously. Everyone is entitled to my opinion. Ho/Hum.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

All you need to know is here. https://t.co/B6sqVHTZCA

[Dominic Frisby @DominicFrisby]

We Are All Far Right Now #farright

[Count Binface @CountBinface]

There now follows a party election broadcast by the Count Binface Party, And if I do say so myself, it's a banger. #VoteBinface #Clacton

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@NotFarLeftAtAll Ratio says no.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@DanielPriestley If they're so keen on redistribution of wealth, why aren't they doing it already? I'd happily accept a few hundred thousand to help buy a house big enough for my family.

[Daniel Priestley @DanielPriestley]

I’m calling BS on these 120 millionaires calling to be taxed more.

Look closely at who signed. A retired footballer whose been paid millions by taxpayers. A retired trader who’s net worth is well under $5M. Retired musicians, film directors and some heirs. People who finished building years ago - half of them aren’t worth the $10M threshold they think needs the wealth tax. Their wealth sits in liquid portfolios. The tax they propose either doesn’t apply to them or they have liquidity to pay it.

Now picture a founder with a £50m biotech firm. Her wealth isn't in a bank account. It's based on a speculative VC round. To pay 2% she has to rip £800k a year out of her business or sell it down piece by piece until someone else owns it.

Or imagine the restauranteur whose chain is finally having a profitable year after a decade of losses. A PE deal to expand gives him a paper worth of £60M and he now has to find £1M a year, every year personally if he wants to grow. 

Imagine the property developer couple who made a lifetime of delayed gratification and good decisions. Their portfolio makes £4M profit which is barely enough to cover the £2M in wealth taxes per year after they draw it from their company and pay the corporation tax - 100% essentially goes to tax.

The signatories aren't offering to pay a tax. They're volunteering someone else to. Someone who is still building, investing, growing, hiring.

HMRC already accepts voluntary payments. Any of these self-aggrandising millionaires could send extra money tomorrow. ALL of them benefited from lower tax rates and should pay the difference if they want to make a start. None of them will. They don't want to give more. They want a law that forces others to.

The wealth tax they propose won't work. It will backfire.

We don't need to guess. In 1990, twelve OECD countries had a wealth tax. Today it's three.

Sweden scrapped theirs. Germany suspended theirs. France tried it for decades, watched tens of thousands of wealthy families leave, collected a fraction of what was promised, and Macron repealed it because the country was losing more than it raised.

The £24bn projection assumes nobody changes their behaviour. Nobody has ever designed a tax where nobody changes their behaviour. Liquid wealth leaves. Illiquid wealth, the businesses and farms and employers, stays behind and gets squeezed.

The tax doesn't catch the guy with the yacht. It catches the guy with the factory.

It will end up hitting normal people.

Every tax "on the very richest" drifts downwards. Income tax started in 1799 as a temporary 3% levy on the richest 3% to fight Napoleon. Now workers are paying a 45% marginal rate. Inheritance tax was designed for stately homes and now catches three-bed semis in Surrey. VAT launched at 8%. It's now 20%.

When the wealth tax raises a fraction of what was promised, and it will, no Chancellor repeals it. They lower the threshold. £10m becomes £5m becomes £2m becomes your parents' house.

Here's what I'd say to the 120…

If you want your capital serving Britain, I'm with you. The best way is to back founders. Fund the startups and scale-ups on great terms like they do in the USA. Help build companies that scale here instead of selling early to America. Growing businesses already pour money into the Treasury through corporation tax, employer's NI and PAYE on every job they create. Back success and productivity. Stop rewarding fiscal deficits with good money after bad.

That's harder than signing a letter. You don’t get to look like a socialist super-hero. It's also the only version of "proud to pay" that's ever made a country richer.

Don't pretend to ask the government to tax you… or people twice as rich as you.

Invest in real growth and success.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@benonwine Wringer-outer for a one-armed window cleaner.

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Andy Burnham has rowed back on plans to raise the tax-free personal allowance. No actual thought had gone into it. He mooted a wealth tax to pay for it but no thought has gone into that either. If he is at all well advised, he will drop that as an idea as well. But that's going to be the tone for his administration... backing away from bad ideas, eroding what little credibility he has.

Within a few months (possibly weeks), much like his predecessor, he'll be out of ideas and reduced to witless tinkering around the margins. He will accomplish nothing. He will succeed only in breaking the remaining things that still work with gimmick policies such as capping busfares.

There's a reason for this. There is no intellectual depth to Andy Burnham. What you see is what you get. He hasn't analysed or understood the problems, not least because he has little idea what the problems are, and lacks the knowledge and sophistication to craft solutions. Lambs to the slaughter.

This, though, is why there's the perception that the civil service is running the show. To a point, they are. They're keeping the show running inside the managerial norms because the politicians are unable to provide better direction. Their dumb ideas just don't work and should not be attempted. Unlike most on the right, I actually regard an obstructive civil service as an essential pillar of any democratic system that puts novices in charge.

As such, all government is a negotiation with the treasury and the civil service. Every PM in modern times has had to learn this the hard way, which is why we now have a long list of underachieving ex prime ministers. The only way to succeed in government is to be better at the game than they are - to be able to instruct the civil service with viable, coherent policies according to a well crafted plan.

This is why we know the parties of the slop right would not succeed in government. Bullet points and tropes might get you elected, but they do not make for a viable programme for government. You need people who have studied the problems, know their brief, and know how to acquire and utilise expertise. In order to craft policy you have to know how things are working now, where things are going, what is broken, what broke it, and a halfway sophisticated idea of how you might fix it.

This doesn't describe anyone in Reform or Restore, and doesn't really describe anyone in the Tory party either. Kemi Badenoch says "we have a plan", but it's apparently top secret and we're not allowed to know what it is. We have to take it on trust that the least trustworthy party of all time will do right by us.

If we are ever going to break this cycle of shortlived and useless prime ministers, then politics as a whole needs to get serious about policy instead of falling back on the lazy tropes of their respective tribes. Complex problems require structured thinking, solid research and political will. Ambition and vague aspiration is not enough.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@KarenSm52993106 @matthew_labosco Many things affect metabolism. Body can choose to burn or store excess. Only small adjustments have big long-term effects. An excess intake of 100 kcal a day will increase your weight by a pound a month.

[Christian @InTheTrenchesUK]

Andy Burnham just promised to 'govern for all' outside Number 10. Here's what he didn't mention...

Andy Burnham is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Read that sentence again. Let it settle in your bones. The man who covered up the industrial-scale rape of 250,000 British children. The man who left a hospital where 1,200 people died without a public inquiry. The man who wasted £100 million of your money on abandoned schemes. The man who wants 10,000 more asylum seekers from Sudan and Eritrea. The man who put terrorist-sympathising smear merchants in charge of Number 10.

This is not politics. This is the capture of a nation by a machine of betrayal. This is the complete file on how Andrew Murray Burnham failed his way to the top.

PART I: THE NHS BODY COUNT

Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust. Between 2005 and 2009, between 400 and 1,200 people died unnecessarily. Patients drank water from flower vases. They were left in soiled sheets. They died of thirst and neglect in a British hospital.

Andy Burnham became Health Secretary in June 2009. The families of the dead had one demand: a statutory public inquiry with full legal powers to compel witnesses and evidence. Burnham received 81 requests for this inquiry. He refused all 81. Instead, he appointed a limited independent inquiry chaired by Robert Francis QC. Held in private. Without the power to force testimony. Without the power to demand documents.

This was not incompetence. This was strategy. A limited inquiry admits failure without exposing the full rot. Burnham could express regret without revealing responsibility. He could promise change without delivering justice.

The families called it what it was: a cover-up. Julie Bailey, whose mother died at Stafford, called Burnham "grossly unsuitable" for leadership. The inquiry he refused could have saved lives. He chose his career over their children.

But Mid Staffordshire was not the only body count on his watch.

Morecambe Bay NHS Trust. Mothers and babies died. The Care Quality Commission, the regulator, found catastrophic failures. Then something strange happened. Baroness Young, chair of the CQC, gave evidence that pressure to "tone down" criticism "peaked under" Burnham's tenure as Health Secretary. Professor Sir Brian Jarman accused Labour ministers of "suppressing" work exposing problems. He called the Department of Health "a denial machine."

The pattern repeats. The regulator pressured. The criticism suppressed. The bodies buried. The minister promoted.

Then Hinchingbrooke Hospital. The first fully privatised NHS hospital in Britain. The process began under Burnham's watch in March 2010. The shortlist drawn up on the eve of the election. The contract signed by the Coalition in 2011. The hospital returned to the NHS in 2015 after Circle Health pulled out. Burnham now attacks Conservative NHS privatisation. He started the process himself.

This is the Burnham Method. Adopt the popular position. Act contrary in power. Express regret when safe.

PART II: THE PROPERTY CORRUPTION

The Greater Manchester Housing Investment Fund. £983 million of public money. The largest housing fund in the country. The promise: affordable homes for Mancunians. The reality: a feeding trough for developers.

Burnham's administration directed over £600 million to a single developer. Renaker. One company. Sixty percent of the entire fund. The £140 million loans were approved despite "inconsistent" viability reports. The Greater Manchester Combined Authority failed to obtain asset and liability statements from the developer. A report into these failures was suppressed for 13 months. The duty of candour was ignored.

Aubrey Weis, a wealthy landowner, challenged these loans in court. The Competition Appeal Tribunal ruled for the GMCA in 2025. The Court of Appeal heard the case in June 2026. Days before the Makerfield by-election that would make Burnham Prime Minister. The timing was not accidental. The corruption was not theoretical.

Then the donations. The 2026 campaign. £1,400 from Citybranch, a property developer. Burnham claims he never met the donor. The man who controlled £983 million in housing funds cannot remember meeting a property developer who gave him money.

The revolving door spins faster. James Purnell, Burnham's chief of staff in Number 10, was CEO of Flint Global. A lobbying firm. Clients include Huawei, Apple, BP, Amazon, Uber, Glencore. The man who advises the Prime Minister on policy spent years selling access to the same corporations. Transparency campaigners warned of conflicts of interest. Burnham appointed him anyway.

This is how it works. Public money flows to developers. Developers donate to campaigns. Campaigns win elections. Lobbyists write policy. The circle closes. You pay for it all.

PART III: THE RAPE COVER-UP

Operation Augusta. Manchester, 2003 to 2005. Police identified up to 100 men collecting girls from care homes like takeaway orders. At least 57 children in Manchester social services care, some as young as 12, were being gang-raped, trafficked, and tortured. Police had names. Police had addresses. Police had evidence.

The operation was shut down in 2005. Not because the danger passed. Not because the men stopped. Shut down because senior officers and Labour councillors were more afraid of "inflaming community tensions" than of protecting raped children. The perpetrators were predominantly Pakistani heritage Muslim men. The victims were white British girls. The decision was political. The children were abandoned.

Andy Burnham became Mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017. He commissioned independent reviews into historic child sexual exploitation in Manchester, Oldham, and Rochdale. The reviews confirmed widespread organised abuse. The reviews confirmed institutional failure. The reviews delivered no justice.

In 2024, the reviewers Malcolm Newsom and Gary Ridgway resigned. They alleged that authorities were "lawyering up" and obstructing the investigation. The duty of candour was missing. The cover-up continued.

Maggie Oliver knows the truth. She was the detective who blew the whistle on the Rochdale scandal. She worked with Burnham's reviews. She called the Oldham review "nothing less than a cover-up." She accused Burnham of failing to "grasp the nettle" on current failures. She saw the pattern: admit past failures to protect the present.

The numbers are staggering. The Rupert Lowe Rape Gang Inquiry Report, published June 2026, crowdfunded by 20,000 people, documented 250,000 young white British girls abused since the 1950s across 149 local authorities. The methods were torture. Girls as young as 11 collected from schools. Drugged with alcohol. Passed between men like currency. Taken to "red rooms" for daily gang rape. Trafficked to Pakistan. Forced to convert to Islam and marry rapists to legitimise pregnancies. Called "white trash" and "kuffar" by their abusers. The rape was racial. The rape was religious. The rape was targeted.

The institutional collapse was total. Police called victims "prostitutes." Social services placed children in trafficking hubs. NHS recorded genital injuries in children then discharged them without safeguarding. Schools excluded victims instead of protecting them. Taxi licensing renewed permits for drivers who transported children to rape houses.

Burnham's response? He called critics "desperate." He dismissed Reform UK's allegations as "smears." He stood by his record. His record is 250,000 victims and no justice.

Then there is Bev Craig. Executive Member for Adult Social Care in Manchester from 2017 to 2021. While Burnham commissioned his reviews, Craig oversaw the same adult social services that the Lowe Report says undermined parents, placed children in trafficking hubs, closed cases despite clear exploitation indicators, called victims "prostitutes," offered contraception instead of protection. She knew where the bodies were buried because she helped bury them.

In December 2021, council leader Richard Leese stepped down after 25 years covering the Operation Augusta period. His chosen successor? Bev Craig. The woman who oversaw the failures became the leader. Then Burnham's Deputy Mayor for Economy. Then the Labour candidate for Greater Manchester Mayor in July 2026. The coronation complete. Burnham to Prime Minister. Craig to Mayor. The rape gang inquiry investigating their city while they seize national power.

PART IV: THE OPEN BORDERS BETRAYAL

"Open Borders Andy." "Open Borders Burnham." The Reform UK nickname that sticks because the record supports it.

The double game is simple. Tough talk for election cameras. Soft reality for policy. In 2024 and 2025, Burnham made sceptical noises about mass migration. He supported some of Shabana Mahmood's reforms. He talked about ending hotel accommodation. The Critic saw through it immediately: "Suspect on immigration." "Embraces state multiculturalism." The nickname fits the record better than the messaging.

The record is clear. Burnham opposed longer waits for permanent settlement. He backed attacks on Indefinite Leave to Remain reforms. He supported ending "no recourse to public funds" restrictions. He wants asylum seekers working while claims are processed. This creates a magnetic pull factor for illegal entry. Why risk the Channel when you can work legally while waiting?

Then the bombshell. Reform UK's Zia Yusuf revealed Burnham's plans. Direct relocation of more than 10,000 additional asylum seekers from overseas. Specifically high-arrival nationalities like Sudan and Eritrea. Reversal of delays on permanent status for the post-2021 "Boriswave" cohort. Potentially granting benefits and family sponsorship rights to hundreds of thousands at catastrophic fiscal cost.

The Greater Manchester Combined Authority under Burnham spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on schemes helping migrants, including refugees, access housing, benefits, and services. Your taxes. Their priority. While British citizens sleep rough. While veterans wait for housing. While your grandmother waits for a hip replacement.

Nigel Farage has publicly blamed Burnham for the North West receiving a disproportionate share of asylum seekers. The "Open Borders Burnham" label is not rhetoric. It is description. The North West has cheaper housing costs. Long-standing Home Office policy places asylum seekers where rent is low. Burnham did not create the policy. But he did not fight it. He welcomed it. He built his "progressive" brand on it.

As Prime Minister, Burnham avoided immigration entirely in early speeches. He listens only to "insane open borders backbench MPs." Same soft policies. New face. Worse crisis. The borders remain open. The boats keep coming. The bill keeps rising. And Burnham is in Downing Street.

PART V: THE ISLAMIST SOFTNESS

Prevent. The UK's primary counter-terrorism safeguarding tool. The system that identifies vulnerable individuals at risk of radicalisation. The shield against Islamist terrorism.

In 2016, as Shadow Home Secretary, Andy Burnham called Prevent "toxic." He compared the reporting duty to internment in Northern Ireland. He said it made Muslims feel spied upon and unfairly targeted. He argued it risked creating the conditions for extremism to flourish. He wanted it scrapped or overhauled. This is not criticism. This is dismantling the main tool against Islamist radicalisation.

Then MEND. Muslim Engagement and Development. A group later named by Communities Secretary Michael Gove as having an "Islamist orientation." MEND hosted speakers supporting physical punishment for Jews, gay people, and minority sects. The Labour Party cut ties with MEND. Burnham did not. He endorsed MEND campaigns. He spoke at MEND fringe events. He platformed the group while it spread extremism.

Then CAGE. The organisation that praised "Jihadi John." The group that defended individuals linked to extremism. In 2021, Burnham co-hosted an interfaith iftar with the Ramadan Tent Project. Keir Starmer had withdrawn from the same event due to the group's CEO backing CAGE. Burnham stayed. Burnham hosted. The Muslim vote matters more than counter-terrorism concerns.

The Manchester Arena bombing. 22 May 2017. Salman Abedi. Islamist terrorist. 22 dead. 1,017 injured. The worst terrorist attack in Britain since 7/7. Burnham's response? Community cohesion. Avoid "Islamophobia." Prioritise relations. Do not confront. Do not name. The "Islamist-appeasing" accusations stick because the pattern is clear: the Muslim vote over border control, community relations over confronting political Islam, cohesion over courage.

The grooming gangs connect here too. The 250,000 victims. The predominantly Pakistani heritage perpetrators. The honour/shame clan codes. The targeting of white British girls as "kuffar." Burnham commissioned weak reviews. He avoided statutory public inquiries. The Muslim voting blocs of Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale mattered more than raped children. The pattern repeats. The community protected. The victims abandoned.

PART VI: THE STATE CAPTURE

July 2026. Andy Burnham becomes Prime Minister. His first appointments reveal everything.

Alison Phillips. Board member of Hope Not Hate Limited. The private company arm of Hope Not Hate. The same Hope Not Hate that faced Charity Commission investigations for political activity. The same Hope Not Hate that employed Liron Velleman, convicted of attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child. Phillips made Director of Transition in Burnham's Number 10. Her job: avoid the "early mistakes that befell Starmer."

Matthew McGregor. Former Director of Campaigns and Communications at Hope Not Hate. Made Director of Political Strategy in Burnham's Number 10. The man who ran smear campaigns now controls government political strategy.

Think about what this means. A man who ran Hope Not Hate's operations now controls the Prime Minister's political strategy. A woman who sat on Hope Not Hate's board while they faced regulatory investigations now controls the Prime Minister's transition. Anna Turley, former Hope Not Hate director, is already Labour Party Chair.

Hope Not Hate is not a charity. It is the continuation of Searchlight, a communist militant operation founded in 1964. It uses charitable status to launder taxpayer money into political warfare. It employs convicted child sex offenders. It uses blackmail, deception, and alleged drug supply to manufacture sources. It collaborates with the BBC to target political enemies. It spreads misinformation during civil unrest.

And now its operatives run the British government.

PART VII: THE METHOD

The Burnham Method is consistent across every scandal. Five steps. Recognisable. Repeatable.

Step One: Adopt the popular position. NHS defender. Civil liberties champion. Hillsborough campaigner. The man of the people.

Step Two: Act contrary when in power. Privatise NHS services. Implement ID cards. Suppress inquiries. Waste public money.

Step Three: Use limited inquiries. Avoid statutory public inquiries. Appoint friendly reviewers. Control the scope. Control the timing. Admit past failures to protect present power.

Step Four: Surround with lobbyists. Burson Marsteller. Flint Global. James Purnell. The revolving door spins. Access is sold. Policy is written.

Step Five: Express regret when safe. Years later. When politically convenient. When the damage is done. The apology tours begin.

The contradictions are stark. NHS defender who presided over mass death. Civil liberties champion who implemented ID cards. Anti-surveillance while voting for ID cards. Pro-union while appointing a chief of staff from a union-busting firm. Anti-privatisation while starting the Hinchingbrooke process. Pro-inquiry while voting against Iraq War investigations. Anti-war while voting for Iraq. Transparency while surrounded by non-transparent lobbyists. Man of the people while a career politician since age 24 with a Cambridge education.

PART VIII: THE MONEY

June 24, 2026. The day after the Makerfield by-election made Burnham Prime Minister. Two companies incorporated. Same day. Same address.

Office of Andy Burnham Ltd. Company number 17299283. Director: Andrew Murray Burnham. Correspondence address: 71 to 75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQ.

Andy Burnham for Leader Ltd. Company number 17300460. Director: Andrew Murray Burnham. Correspondence address: 71 to 75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQ.

Both verified by RAPID FORMATIONS LIMITED ACSP on June 19, 2026. Both active. Both controlled by the Prime Minister.

The funding tells the story. March to April 2026. £20,000 from trade unions. £10,000 from Fire Brigades Union. £5,000 from Communication Workers Union. £5,000 from Unison. The union paymasters. Then £1,400 from Citybranch, a property developer. The developer donor. The man who controlled £983 million in housing funds cannot remember meeting a property developer who gave him money.

The MPs' expenses scandal adds texture. The £215,000 London flat purchased in 2005, part-funded by taxpayer ACA claims. The IKEA receipt including a bathrobe, claimed as a "genuine oversight" and repaid. The spousal involvement. Marie France van Heel, his wife, "regularly in touch with fees office to negotiate claims." The June 2006 refusal when the fees office rejected covering both London and constituency mortgages as it breached rules. The 2010 leasing out of the flat when mortgage claims were banned, joking it was to avoid divorce.

The 2023 speeding conviction. 78mph in a 40mph zone. 95% over the limit. £1,984 fine. Six points. Rules for thee, not for me. The public safety champion endangering the public.

PART IX: THE FABIAN WOLF

The Burnham Method is not accidental. It is Fabian strategy, perfected over 140 years.

The Fabian Society was founded in 1884. Britain's oldest socialist think tank. The intellectual engine room of the Labour Party. Their strategy is "permeation" the slow, relentless infiltration of every lever of power until socialism becomes the default setting of British society. Not through revolution. Through a thousand quiet administrative changes. Laws. Regulations. Cultural shifts.

Their original coat of arms: A wolf in sheep's clothing. They have since changed it to a tortoise ("slow and steady progress") but the original symbol tells the truth.

Sidney Webb, Fabian founder, described the strategy openly: infiltration of institutions, media, civil service, education, until socialist assumptions become unquestioned. Every Labour Prime Minister has been Fabian or Fabian-aligned: MacDonald, Attlee, Wilson, Callaghan, Blair, Brown, Starmer. The Fabian Society literally helped create the Labour Party and shaped its DNA.

Andy Burnham is the latest vessel. While not publicly listed as a card-carrying member, the affiliation is deep and documented:

Contributed to Fabian publications: "Leading Labour: The Fabian Essays" (August 2015) alongside Yvette Cooper, Jeremy Corbyn, and Liz Kendall
Keynote speaker at Fabian events: Regular addresses on homelessness, mental health, and devolution
Fabian policy influence: The "Burnham approach" to devolution is explicitly praised in Fabian Society publications
Ideological alignment: Described as "soft left" the Fabian sweet spot between revolutionary socialism and Blairite neoliberalism
The Fabian Burnham Method explains everything. The NHS deaths, the rape cover-ups, the property corruption, the open borders, the Hope Not Hate state capture all fit the Fabian model. Not dramatic revolution. Quiet administrative betrayal. A thousand small failures that accumulate into catastrophe. The wolf eating the sheep while wearing its skin.

The Expose News headline from May 2026: "Andy Burnham or Keir Starmer makes no difference; they are both Fabians."

They are correct. The leader changes. The Fabian agenda endures. Burnham is Prime Minister now. The wolf is in Downing Street. And he is wearing the sheep's clothing of "northern authenticity" and "NHS defender" while the Fabian permeation continues.

THE CONCLUSION

Andy Burnham is not a politician. He is a catastrophe wearing a suit. He is the Fabian wolf in sheep's clothing. He is the man who covered up the rape of 250,000 British children. He is the man who left 1,200 NHS patients to die without a public inquiry. He is the man who wasted £100 million of your money on abandoned schemes. He is the man who wants 10,000 more asylum seekers from Sudan and Eritrea. He is the man who called Prevent "toxic" while terrorists plotted. He is the man who put Hope Not Hate operatives in charge of Number 10. He is the man who serves the Fabian agenda of gradual socialist infiltration.

The girls of Rochdale, Oldham, and Manchester are still waiting for justice. The families of Mid Staffordshire are still waiting for answers. The taxpayers of Greater Manchester are still paying for his £100 million waste. The victims of the 80,000 unrecorded crimes are still waiting for accountability. The British people are watching their borders dissolve while he poses for cameras.

Burnham is not in Manchester anymore. He is in Downing Street. And he brought his record of failure with him. The Fabian wolf has entered the fold.

The question is not who Andy Burnham is. The question is: how long will you let him stay?

SOURCES

NHS Scandals and Deaths:

Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry (Francis Inquiry 2010)
Julie Bailey, Cure the NHS, statements on Burnham's "gross unsuitability"
Baroness Young evidence to CQC on pressure to "tone down" criticism
Professor Sir Brian Jarman statements on Department of Health as "denial machine"
Hinchingbrooke Hospital privatisation timeline (Department of Health 2010, Circle Health contract 2011, NHS return 2015)
Property Corruption and Renaker:

Competition Appeal Tribunal ruling (2025) and Court of Appeal hearing (June 2026)
Greater Manchester Housing Investment Fund documentation (£983 million total)
Electoral Commission donation records: Citybranch £1,400 (2026)
James Purnell appointment and Flint Global client list (Huawei, Apple, BP, Amazon, Uber, Glencore)
Rape Cover-Up and Grooming Gangs:

Operation Augusta police files (2003-2005)
Rupert Lowe Rape Gang Inquiry Report (June 2026, 219 pages, crowdfunded £600,000)
Maggie Oliver whistleblower statements to Times Radio and The Telegraph ("cover-up," "failed to grasp the nettle")
Malcolm Newsom and Gary Ridgway resignation from Burnham's reviews (2024)
Bev Craig career timeline: Executive Member for Adult Social Care (2017-2021), Council Leader (December 2021), Deputy Mayor (2021-2026), Labour candidate for Mayor (July 2026)
Open Borders and Immigration:

The Critic, May 2026: "Andy Burnham's immigration double game"
Reform UK and Zia Yusuf statements on 10,000 additional asylum seekers and reversal of permanent status delays
Nigel Farage statements on "Open Borders Burnham" and North West asylum dispersal
Burnham support for asylum seeker work rights and ending "no recourse to public funds"
Islamist Softness and Prevent:

Andy Burnham 2016 statements as Shadow Home Secretary calling Prevent "toxic" and comparing to internment
Michael Gove House of Commons statement on MEND "Islamist orientation"
Burnham MEND fringe event attendance and endorsement records
Ramadan Tent Project iftar 2021 and Keir Starmer withdrawal
Manchester Arena bombing inquiry and Burnham "community cohesion" response
Hope Not Hate State Capture:

Companies House: Office of Andy Burnham Ltd (17299283) and Andy Burnham for Leader Ltd (17300460), incorporated 24 June 2026
Alison Phillips appointment as Director of Transition, Burnham Number 10
Matthew McGregor appointment as Director of Political Strategy, Burnham Number 10
Anna Turley Labour Party Chair and former Hope Not Hate director
Charity Commission investigations into Hope Not Hate (2024, 2025)
Liron Velleman conviction (January 2026) for attempted sexual communication with a child
Fabian Society Connection:

Fabian Society: "Leading Labour: The Fabian Essays" (August 2015)
Fabian Society publications praising "The Burnham approach" to devolution
The Expose News, May 2026: "Andy Burnham or Keir Starmer makes no difference; they are both Fabians"
Sidney Webb "permeation" strategy documentation
Fabian Society coat of arms history (wolf in sheep's clothing)
Personal Corruption and Expenses:

MPs' expenses scandal documentation (Telegraph 2009): bathrobe, spousal involvement, £215,000 flat
Companies House: Leigh BPT Limited (08786493), dissolved, Burnham director 2013-2016
Speeding conviction 2023: 78mph in 40mph zone, £1,984 fine, 6 points
Electoral Commission: trade union donations 2026 (Fire Brigades Union £10,000, Communication Workers Union £5,000, Unison £5,000)

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Pollyanna Burnham has absolutely no idea what's about to happen to him. He has a head full of bad ideas that weren't tried by any of his recent predecessors, not because his predecessors were smarter than him, but because they were rapidly disabused before getting down to business. Burnham, though, thinks that bad ideas will become good ideas if he's the one implementing them. For Burnham, the normal laws of political reality do not apply. There are hard lessons for him behind the door of Number Ten, waiting like starved crocodiles for their hapless prey.

While this is going to be endlessly entertaining and wholly predictable for us politicos, it is not without consequence. This is the gear shift that pushes the "just about managing" into the "not managing" bracket. This is the turn that pushes businesses and households irrecoverably into the red and upends what people have been struggling to maintain. This is the narcissistic clueless meddling that puts the country into a death spiral. The anger will be palpable.

By that, I don't necessarily mean the sort of riots triggered by the tone-deaf and ineffably useless Starmer. That cannot be ruled out, of course, but this is the inflection point where the normally reserved, who just prefer to get on with their lives, are dragged into the wake turbulence against their will. It's the bill hike that obliterates the last of their disposable income. It's the last of the small pleasures that make the drudgery of making ends meet bearable denied - when there's no longer any reward for taking the punishment - and there's no end in sight.

This is when Burnham's entire psychological construct begins to dissolve. The world as he understands it is one where if you're nice, with good intentions, then you are liked - and the only reason you could dislike such a person is if you yourself are not nice. Starmer was better equipped to be hated because he had no empathy, and public sentiment of any kind had no bearing on his demeanour. Burnham, on the other hand, wants and needs to be liked. This is often a fatal flaw in politicians.

What makes Burnham especially dangerous is that he will pull at any and all levers in search of doing the nice thing, in order to be liked, oblivious to the second order consequences, and will be shocked, surprised and horrified to learn that his every action has the opposite of intended effect on public morale. He will not understand why. He is not capable of understanding why, even if it is explained to him in the most gentle terms by a compassionate softly-spoken primary school teacher.

Unlike, Starmer, though, he won't go into the bunker to hide. He will take it to mean that people just haven't gotten to know him yet, and need to see more of him so they can understand that he's a nice guy and on your side. And when it doesn't work, he will blame the interface layer. If we don't get it, it just means something is lost in translation. That's when nice turns nasty.

This is the hole he will keep digging, the scab he simply won't stop picking until the sore becomes an open wound. WHY WON'T YOU UNDERSTAND HOW NICE I AM?? They say the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Burnham, though, does not plan to build a road. He intends to drill directly to Hell with industrial tunnelling machines. There is no force of magic that can make socialism work.

Crucially, what Burnham doesn't understand, is that the Labour party has become the party of the status quo for a reason. There is nowhere else for the left to go. Tony Blair, for all his many faults, was smart enough to understand certain economic laws of gravity. He shitcanned socialism because he knew that you can't hope to help people if the state is broke. He rebuilt the state as a managerialist welfare dispensary.

That might have been a viable avenue for 1997. But "sharing the proceeds of growth" is contingent on actual growth, which is no longer possible in a hyper-regulated, high tax moribund economy. Blairism is as dead as socialism. The bottom line is that there is no left wing solution to what ails us.

Burnham, though, believes enough time has passed for us to have forgotten, so that we'll mistake old ideas for new ideas. A lot of people probably will fall for it again, but it doesn't take very long to relearn the lessons. The Finding Out stage happens faster each time. On that basis, Burnham is not a man who will make it to the next election intact. He doesn't have much to work with. He has no mandate, no fiscal headroom, limited political capital, and absolutely no talent. A man promoted to captain of the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. The only way for Burnham is down, down and down.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@benonwine The community note says it was because of fire risk, but I bet if they had been pride, trans or Palestine flags the Council would have let them remain.

[Simon Fox @SimonFoxWriter]

In recent years, I have become more “right wing” in my views … in order to retain the VERY SAME political/cultural values that I held 30 years ago. I have been compelled to change my position … in order to keep my position unchanged.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@MichaelAArouet This isn't a problem. Under socialism, all restaurants will be owned and run by the state. If Laura is a good cook she will be able to work for the state and earn the same minimum wage as everyone else. Apart from the politbureau, of course.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@MichaelAArouet Leftism requires a certain mental deficiency.

[Daniel Priestley @DanielPriestley]

Socialists imagine a class struggle. In their made-up fantasy the CEO is in competition with low level workers, the wealthy entrepreneur is stealing from the underpaid nurse.

In reality, workers do not compete vertically they compete horizontally.

Entrepreneurs compete with entrepreneurs. Investors outbid each other. CEOs are benchmarked against other CEOs. Nurses are hired from a pool of nurses. Etc.

The CEOs pay has no correlation to the entry level workers. The Football star on £300K a week isn’t linked to the person selling drinks in the stadium. A biotech entrepreneur raising VC capital isn’t paid relative to a cleaner.

What is linked is the demand and supply dynamic of each role.

If a company places an ad for a qualified truck driver and 150 people apply for the role, then the company knows it does not need to increase wages for that role. If the company has an open role for months, it is forced to look at the compensation package.

Same for a CEO. A board representing shareholders would like to hire a CEO for a lot less if they could. Their dream scenario would be to hire a CEO who brings in institutional investors, attracts top executives, drives innovation and growth, keeps margins steady and is a good public face for the business even under pressure. It turns out there aren’t a lot of these people looking for work and if you want one you have to pay more than other companies are offering.

The class struggle isn’t vertical it’s horizontal. CEOs are in competition with CEOs. Retail workers are in competition with retail workers. Demand and supply dynamics set the price.

Sure you can say that a CEO want’s profitability and would like wages to be lower BUT it’s not up to the CEO - demand and supply tension sets the price of workers. An Airline like RyanAir would like free pilots if they could get them but they can’t… so they pay the market rate.

The reason incomes are rising at the top and falling at the bottom is not class warfare. It’s technology and globalisation.

Technology makes basic jobs simple, remote or fully automated. At the same time tech makes executive roles more leveraged, more important and more valuable.

A CEO used to run a smaller organisation. Today a CEO who’s 2% better on a $5B company is generating $100M more. Seems sensible to try and pay a few million to get $100M.

Globalisation has put workers from all over the world in completion with each other - downward pressure on wages. Globalisation has given CEOs more market opportunities to explore - upside opportunity to unlock.

The rich are not very interested in buying houses that poor people own. The poor are not buying up the homes the rich want. They are separate groups living separate lives. Try finding the genuinely rich people whose strategy is to hoard normal residential homes - it barely exists as a thing. About 85% of landlords are people who own 1-4 properties. Super-landlords (100+ properties) are 0.2% of landlords and own a tiny fraction of the 30M homes in the UK… and they’re heavily taxed.

Class warfare isn’t real. It’s an imagined war in the minds of socialists.

Demand and supply dynamics are real. To the degree it is measured in class, it’s a horizontal competition not a vertical one.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@RealJamesWoods @Oftheforest2 Order a portion for their table.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@CathyYoung63 @pensandpoison Why? It's a personal list. She says, "My top ten. . .", not "The top ten. . ." Your list might be different.

[Gareth Davies @GarethDavies007]

When I was a boy we didn’t have:-

Machetes
Rape gangs
Acid attacks
Honour killings
Tuberculosis
Arranged marriages
Declining IQ
Women on fire
Growing anti semitism
Cousin marriages
Polygamy
Halal
Non white race baiters
FGM
County lines
Jihadis

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@HNathan28196 @DanielPriestley @ZackPolanski What's stopping you from joining the elites?

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@ukserf @DanielPriestley @ZackPolanski Except everybody would be poorer than before the experiment started.

[Prospero #NotFarWrong @prospero1960]

@DanielPriestley @ZackPolanski Zack Polanski is an imbecile.