| Andy Burnham's speech 15:26 - Sep 29 with 2033 views | Southamptonfan |
He has just given a very passionate, daring and emotional speech at the Labour conference, designed to revive and inspire the country. He certainly comes across as "someone different". The Triple Lock will go. A new social care system free at the point of delivery. We will get to vote on it before it happens. Are you more likely to vote for or against?
First thoughts are that things do need reform. People should not have to use their own savings and their house to pay for care IMO. People who need daily care, not emergency medicine are clogging up our hospitals. A care service, would greatly alleviate pressure on the NHS and doctors surgeries etc. But would you be happy to.pay a new universal tax to pay for it? Pensioners will still have a rise every year of at least 2.5 per cent, but will not have to give away savings when they need care in later life.
An admittance that welfare needs to be sorted out with more support needed to get young people into work. A new relationship with the EU mentioned too. At least he is trying to bring new ideas to the table, trying to bring hope, trying to change things. Will he deliver it? I don't know but he sounds convincing. [Post edited 29 Sep 15:28]
|  |
| |  |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 15:36 - Sep 29 with 1527 views | Chesham_Saint |
The only thing that concerns me about him on here is that he supports Everton.
Also, his idea about half time drinks is bad.
Beyond that, from a UI perspective, I don’t give a shit. |  |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 15:38 - Sep 29 with 1520 views | Joiedevivre |
We’ve had 20 years of government expansion. Government spend increasing again and again.
Young people will never be able to own anything if they keep getting taxed extortionate amounts. And this Labour government - Tory before it - cements that future for years to come. |  | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 15:56 - Sep 29 with 1428 views | BLEEDRED |
I think everyone agrees that the care system is not fit for purpose, but for over 20 years no one has been serious about doing anything about it. No one is willing to pay for it so it will probably drag on for many more years.
I have just finished selling my Uncles house to pay off a very large care home bill. The house had been in the family for over 100 years we were left with a few thousand pounds. Now my mother is needing care but as she owns her home get little help with the cost and has been told she will have to pay the full cost of her care home. Her sister who is already in a care home is fully funded because she didn't work or own anything, fair?? Work save all your life end up with nothing, spend all your life save nothing and it's all free | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:11 - Sep 29 with 1382 views | Southamptonfan |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 15:56 - Sep 29 by BLEEDRED |
I think everyone agrees that the care system is not fit for purpose, but for over 20 years no one has been serious about doing anything about it. No one is willing to pay for it so it will probably drag on for many more years.
I have just finished selling my Uncles house to pay off a very large care home bill. The house had been in the family for over 100 years we were left with a few thousand pounds. Now my mother is needing care but as she owns her home get little help with the cost and has been told she will have to pay the full cost of her care home. Her sister who is already in a care home is fully funded because she didn't work or own anything, fair?? Work save all your life end up with nothing, spend all your life save nothing and it's all free |
Well, exactly. It is totally wrong that a person saves all their life, and it all gets dwindled away on care bills, yet those who didn't save get care for free anyway. Everyone should get care, and those who save should get to keep their money that their loved ones should inherit. If it means paying an extra tax and / or getting a slightly less increase in my pension, so that everyone gets care, I think I would probabaly vote for that. 90 year olds ringing for an ambulance, when all they need is a carer, clogging up hospital corridors, is a stupid system. It needs to be paid for ofcourse. | |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:33 - Sep 29 with 1330 views | shotters |
My mum was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1975 when she was 27 and been in and out of hospital at various times during her life, she's spent the last 8 years in a care home as she's been bed bound for the last 10 years and has chronic bed sores amongst other things
She's "lucky" that she hasn't had to pay for her care as it's deemed essential and paid for by the NHS, had this not been the case everything she had would have gone years ago
My father in law is approaching 90 and has advanced dementia, he is cared for by my 83 year old mother in law who is really struggling to cope now. When she approached her local council in Essex for help and guidance they didn't want to know or even advise as "they had funds to do it themselves"
Both need care due to illness and it's a lottery as to whether you get care funded or not
I watched Andy Burnham's speech and got quite emotional as it really resonated with me thinking about some of the things that have happened to my mum
This is something that is really important to me and I've been saying for years that at some point we as a country have to have a sensible, grown up conversation about the care system. I'm happy to pay more tax to fund the system if needs be, I'm quite principled about it. As a self employed tradesman I never do any work for cash as if I don't contribute to fund the care my mum receives then who will?
Even if Andy Burnham doesn't succeed in reforming the care system I applaud him for trying, someones got to [Post edited 29 Sep 16:37]
|  |
| Fail we may, sail we must |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:34 - Sep 29 with 1330 views | Ifonly |
It's just more BS. He says that removing the link to earnings from the state pension “will generate significant savings which we will use to build up our National Care Service.” This is nonsense. It won't save anything like enough to pay for what's been talked about and it's misleading to suggest otherwise. But then he says that the state pension "will hold its value relative to earnings over time". Say what?? Either the state pension loses value relative to earnings - so there are some savings - or it doesn't, in which case there are no savings. It's basic logic.
Burnham and the Labour party generally just don't understand that it's the economy that pays for all their spending and the economy is being strangled. The first priority should be to stop strangling the economy. Only when that's done should he worry about new spending. Some might be impressed by emotional speeches, I'm not. I would prefer one with some hard truths, honesty and logic. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:39 - Sep 29 with 1291 views | BLEEDRED |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:11 - Sep 29 by Southamptonfan |
Well, exactly. It is totally wrong that a person saves all their life, and it all gets dwindled away on care bills, yet those who didn't save get care for free anyway. Everyone should get care, and those who save should get to keep their money that their loved ones should inherit. If it means paying an extra tax and / or getting a slightly less increase in my pension, so that everyone gets care, I think I would probabaly vote for that. 90 year olds ringing for an ambulance, when all they need is a carer, clogging up hospital corridors, is a stupid system. It needs to be paid for ofcourse. |
My mother still thinks that she has savings (bonds, Isa, cash in the bank) we haven't the heart to tell her that everything above £23000 is taken to pay her carers | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:51 - Sep 29 with 1246 views | StRipper |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:11 - Sep 29 by Southamptonfan |
Well, exactly. It is totally wrong that a person saves all their life, and it all gets dwindled away on care bills, yet those who didn't save get care for free anyway. Everyone should get care, and those who save should get to keep their money that their loved ones should inherit. If it means paying an extra tax and / or getting a slightly less increase in my pension, so that everyone gets care, I think I would probabaly vote for that. 90 year olds ringing for an ambulance, when all they need is a carer, clogging up hospital corridors, is a stupid system. It needs to be paid for ofcourse. |
I think you're putting a little too much faith in politicians - especially a Fabian Government - without any evidence that they deliver or ever intended to. Do you have no memory prior to yesterday?
Just typical flannel without any detail, and you end up with Tony Blair's 3rd way and richer private businesses, funded by state guarantees.
Whilst they pump billions into NetZero, Ukraine and now a war with Russia and Iran - without anyone asking where the money has come from.
All the while, our quality of life is destroyed, small business are killed off, food standards plummet, farmers are bankrupted and prices rocket. You'd almost think that was the real plan all along.
Well, we know Manchester debt rocketed from 900m to 1.6bn under Burnham. And what have they got for that?
And why do you think Burnham's reshaping of the care system looks anything like your aspirations for it? I bet taxes go up, and up, but it will be used to fund something else entirely. And you will find you still pay for care.
Since when have the public ever got more from the Government by paying more tax? Just one example?
And why can't the Government just redirect all that money that they're screwing off of us from green taxes and manipulated fuel prices, that we never agreed to? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:56 - Sep 29 with 1230 views | solent_toffee |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 15:56 - Sep 29 by BLEEDRED |
I think everyone agrees that the care system is not fit for purpose, but for over 20 years no one has been serious about doing anything about it. No one is willing to pay for it so it will probably drag on for many more years.
I have just finished selling my Uncles house to pay off a very large care home bill. The house had been in the family for over 100 years we were left with a few thousand pounds. Now my mother is needing care but as she owns her home get little help with the cost and has been told she will have to pay the full cost of her care home. Her sister who is already in a care home is fully funded because she didn't work or own anything, fair?? Work save all your life end up with nothing, spend all your life save nothing and it's all free |
Going through something similar with my dad. Worked all his life, served in the army, battled cancer last year and now has dementia and needs to go into care. Everything he has is instantly taken away from him and we are left to pay for the rest of it, which costs an absolute fortune. I dont begrudge that in the slightest, but it is incredible how we regard or disregard the elderly in our society in every way
I've said it before on here, there has to be a cross party agreement to shift the welfare state from dependency to point of need. So many people now are happy to have their basic needs met by the state from UB, housing benefit. child benefit etc and that is passed down generations with little to no contribution to the national 'pot' in addition to accessing all of the services, health care, future pensions etc. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:15 - Sep 29 with 1188 views | shotters |
One of the problems I see with the cost of care homes is that they are owned by private firms, the one that my mum is in is owned by a company who have about 10 in the south of England and it's about profit rather than providing care to the most needy in society
A few years ago I did some decorating work for someone who owned a home and closed it down as "the financial return wasn't as good as it used to be" I was pretty shocked that he said this so openly considering that I'd told him my mum was in a care home that was a mile away from where his was and the work I did for him was redecoration so he could sell the building
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive and simplistic in my thinking but if it's run as a national concern and not for profit then it might not cost so much? | |
| Fail we may, sail we must |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:30 - Sep 29 with 1151 views | Joiedevivre |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:15 - Sep 29 by shotters |
One of the problems I see with the cost of care homes is that they are owned by private firms, the one that my mum is in is owned by a company who have about 10 in the south of England and it's about profit rather than providing care to the most needy in society
A few years ago I did some decorating work for someone who owned a home and closed it down as "the financial return wasn't as good as it used to be" I was pretty shocked that he said this so openly considering that I'd told him my mum was in a care home that was a mile away from where his was and the work I did for him was redecoration so he could sell the building
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive and simplistic in my thinking but if it's run as a national concern and not for profit then it might not cost so much? |
The public sector: famous for its efficiency and value for money  | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:31 - Sep 29 with 1148 views | Ifonly |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:56 - Sep 29 by solent_toffee |
Going through something similar with my dad. Worked all his life, served in the army, battled cancer last year and now has dementia and needs to go into care. Everything he has is instantly taken away from him and we are left to pay for the rest of it, which costs an absolute fortune. I dont begrudge that in the slightest, but it is incredible how we regard or disregard the elderly in our society in every way
I've said it before on here, there has to be a cross party agreement to shift the welfare state from dependency to point of need. So many people now are happy to have their basic needs met by the state from UB, housing benefit. child benefit etc and that is passed down generations with little to no contribution to the national 'pot' in addition to accessing all of the services, health care, future pensions etc. |
You are right, we need to get away from welfare state dependency. Some of this is because the economy isn't growing and generating jobs, but too much is down to people making a choice to live on the sick etc. instead of working. Meanwhile, we're told that we need waves of immigration to staff the jobs that keep basic services running, plus illegal immigrants make dangerous journeys, without stopping in safe countries, drawn in by the generosity of our benefits system.
Unfortunately, the only way to stop all that is to make a life on benefits less attractive and make it pay less. If there was a nicer way to solve the problem that would be great, but there isn't. People bleat about inequality, but we actually need to have more inequality between people on benefits and people who choose to work. We don't need Andy Burnham, we need a government that will make this kind of tough decision. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:35 - Sep 29 with 1134 views | shotters |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:31 - Sep 29 by Ifonly |
You are right, we need to get away from welfare state dependency. Some of this is because the economy isn't growing and generating jobs, but too much is down to people making a choice to live on the sick etc. instead of working. Meanwhile, we're told that we need waves of immigration to staff the jobs that keep basic services running, plus illegal immigrants make dangerous journeys, without stopping in safe countries, drawn in by the generosity of our benefits system.
Unfortunately, the only way to stop all that is to make a life on benefits less attractive and make it pay less. If there was a nicer way to solve the problem that would be great, but there isn't. People bleat about inequality, but we actually need to have more inequality between people on benefits and people who choose to work. We don't need Andy Burnham, we need a government that will make this kind of tough decision. |
That won't be a Labour government
Starmer tried to push through reform and was banjaxed by his back benchers | |
| Fail we may, sail we must |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:37 - Sep 29 with 1130 views | Ifonly |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:15 - Sep 29 by shotters |
One of the problems I see with the cost of care homes is that they are owned by private firms, the one that my mum is in is owned by a company who have about 10 in the south of England and it's about profit rather than providing care to the most needy in society
A few years ago I did some decorating work for someone who owned a home and closed it down as "the financial return wasn't as good as it used to be" I was pretty shocked that he said this so openly considering that I'd told him my mum was in a care home that was a mile away from where his was and the work I did for him was redecoration so he could sell the building
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive and simplistic in my thinking but if it's run as a national concern and not for profit then it might not cost so much? |
Sorry but you're right, that is simplistic. One of the big problems we have in this country is the inefficiency of the public sector. Private sector productivity keeps improving but public sector productivity goes nowhere. As always in economics, this is due to incentives. The private sector is incentivised to be efficient or they go out of business (like in your example). In the public sector the incentive is to spend every penny of your budget or you won't get as much next year. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:42 - Sep 29 with 1116 views | shotters |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:37 - Sep 29 by Ifonly |
Sorry but you're right, that is simplistic. One of the big problems we have in this country is the inefficiency of the public sector. Private sector productivity keeps improving but public sector productivity goes nowhere. As always in economics, this is due to incentives. The private sector is incentivised to be efficient or they go out of business (like in your example). In the public sector the incentive is to spend every penny of your budget or you won't get as much next year. |
True
I should have remembered what a nightmare I had dealing with Woking council with regards t my mum. Constant delays and then finding out the person who was dealing with my mums issue had moved to another department and the cycle started again
Probably time for me to pause on this topic, a classic case of emotion over logic | |
| Fail we may, sail we must |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 18:02 - Sep 29 with 1078 views | Heisenberg |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:37 - Sep 29 by Ifonly |
Sorry but you're right, that is simplistic. One of the big problems we have in this country is the inefficiency of the public sector. Private sector productivity keeps improving but public sector productivity goes nowhere. As always in economics, this is due to incentives. The private sector is incentivised to be efficient or they go out of business (like in your example). In the public sector the incentive is to spend every penny of your budget or you won't get as much next year. |
When you say public sector are you referring to teachers, nurses, social workers, police, emergency services, council services, parks libraries and youth services, highways, bin collection and recycling and of course our wonderful NHS etc etc. Oh and the private sector has been running trains, water and gas and electric services profiteering off what we used to own whilst issuing bonuses to failed managers. |  |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 18:46 - Sep 29 with 991 views | Ifonly |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 18:02 - Sep 29 by Heisenberg |
When you say public sector are you referring to teachers, nurses, social workers, police, emergency services, council services, parks libraries and youth services, highways, bin collection and recycling and of course our wonderful NHS etc etc. Oh and the private sector has been running trains, water and gas and electric services profiteering off what we used to own whilst issuing bonuses to failed managers. |
Yes I'm referring to all those public sector workers. It's not a criticism of individual workers, it's just a statement of fact that the organisations they work for are failing to get any better, despite all the technology available and all the investment that has been thrown at them:
https://taxpayersalliance.com/
According to the ONS (itself a government body) UK public sector productivity increased a pathetic 1% between 1997 and 2025. In contrast, over the same time, total UK productivity increased by 35%. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 18:47 - Sep 29 with 980 views | saintmark1976 |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 17:37 - Sep 29 by Ifonly |
Sorry but you're right, that is simplistic. One of the big problems we have in this country is the inefficiency of the public sector. Private sector productivity keeps improving but public sector productivity goes nowhere. As always in economics, this is due to incentives. The private sector is incentivised to be efficient or they go out of business (like in your example). In the public sector the incentive is to spend every penny of your budget or you won't get as much next year. |
“ The private sector is incentivised to be efficient “ and “ Private sector productivity keeps improving “.
Well, it was wonderfully incentivised and productive in 2008 to the point that the whole banking system was at the point of complete collapse and had to be bailed out by Government using the public’s money.
As for Burnham’s speech. Personally, I can’t see a lot wrong with wanting a joined up Care Service and N H S or seeking closer ties to our biggest export market or for that matter having elections using Proposition Representation. [Post edited 29 Sep 18:49]
| |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 19:26 - Sep 29 with 880 views | Joiedevivre |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 18:47 - Sep 29 by saintmark1976 |
“ The private sector is incentivised to be efficient “ and “ Private sector productivity keeps improving “.
Well, it was wonderfully incentivised and productive in 2008 to the point that the whole banking system was at the point of complete collapse and had to be bailed out by Government using the public’s money.
As for Burnham’s speech. Personally, I can’t see a lot wrong with wanting a joined up Care Service and N H S or seeking closer ties to our biggest export market or for that matter having elections using Proposition Representation. [Post edited 29 Sep 18:49]
|
It would’ve helped if Labour hadn’t been heavily addicted to the tax receipts of a debt-fueled housing bubble, stripped the regulators of teeth under the banner of 'light-touch' oversight, all so they could look the other way to fund their public sector spending spree. Two words: moral hazard.
The crash was a failure of private risk taking and public regulation, not an argument that the private sector itself is inherently culpable. The private sector is efficient… much more than the public sector. Burnham should understand this. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:06 - Sep 29 with 787 views | saintmark1976 |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 19:26 - Sep 29 by Joiedevivre |
It would’ve helped if Labour hadn’t been heavily addicted to the tax receipts of a debt-fueled housing bubble, stripped the regulators of teeth under the banner of 'light-touch' oversight, all so they could look the other way to fund their public sector spending spree. Two words: moral hazard.
The crash was a failure of private risk taking and public regulation, not an argument that the private sector itself is inherently culpable. The private sector is efficient… much more than the public sector. Burnham should understand this. |
So you believe that the government of the time engineered by collusion with the private sector a situation were they were party to the almost complete collapse of the private banking system so they then needed to spend public money to bail them out ? Two words : Interesting Theory. | |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:16 - Sep 29 with 755 views | cocklebreath |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 16:34 - Sep 29 by Ifonly |
It's just more BS. He says that removing the link to earnings from the state pension “will generate significant savings which we will use to build up our National Care Service.” This is nonsense. It won't save anything like enough to pay for what's been talked about and it's misleading to suggest otherwise. But then he says that the state pension "will hold its value relative to earnings over time". Say what?? Either the state pension loses value relative to earnings - so there are some savings - or it doesn't, in which case there are no savings. It's basic logic.
Burnham and the Labour party generally just don't understand that it's the economy that pays for all their spending and the economy is being strangled. The first priority should be to stop strangling the economy. Only when that's done should he worry about new spending. Some might be impressed by emotional speeches, I'm not. I would prefer one with some hard truths, honesty and logic. |
Like mad liz’s speech? I knew you’d be a Tory boy |  |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:24 - Sep 29 with 731 views | kingslandstand1 |
Any mention of the boat gangs and how he's going to stop the free loaders from getting here?
I'm assuming not, as well as doing something about our own welfare free loaders?? |  |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:45 - Sep 29 with 699 views | Southamptonfan |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:24 - Sep 29 by kingslandstand1 |
Any mention of the boat gangs and how he's going to stop the free loaders from getting here?
I'm assuming not, as well as doing something about our own welfare free loaders?? |
That's true that he doesn't mention how they will deal with illegal immigration and that is something that needs sorting. The issue is that the previous government did talk about it, but didn't actually achieve anything and net migration went up by a lot, so they arn't an alternative going by last time round. I suspect that Andy Burnham intends to rejoin the EU, which strangely might give us more power. Leaving the EU has given us very little power to stop.the boats.
Reform who will leave the ECHR, might well stop the boats, but will go harsh on everything else, stopping the scroungers but also probably damaging services and genuine people in need. The social care reform is so.important to so many as seen by the examples on here and lots of.people in life. Having to give away your house and life savings for your own care, has to change, as it's not right.
Ultimately, at the next election, it looks like all of Burnham's plans will be detailed in a manifesto and we can decide. I know he could be another liar, but he is at least sounding genuine and passionate about the change that is needed. [Post edited 29 Sep 20:46]
| |
| |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 21:51 - Sep 29 with 605 views | Ifonly |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:16 - Sep 29 by cocklebreath |
Like mad liz’s speech? I knew you’d be a Tory boy |
Hi cock breath, I'm glad you've been thinking about me.
Not surprised to see you haven't got anything intelligent to say. | | | |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 22:10 - Sep 29 with 573 views | Ifonly |
| Andy Burnham's speech on 20:45 - Sep 29 by Southamptonfan |
That's true that he doesn't mention how they will deal with illegal immigration and that is something that needs sorting. The issue is that the previous government did talk about it, but didn't actually achieve anything and net migration went up by a lot, so they arn't an alternative going by last time round. I suspect that Andy Burnham intends to rejoin the EU, which strangely might give us more power. Leaving the EU has given us very little power to stop.the boats.
Reform who will leave the ECHR, might well stop the boats, but will go harsh on everything else, stopping the scroungers but also probably damaging services and genuine people in need. The social care reform is so.important to so many as seen by the examples on here and lots of.people in life. Having to give away your house and life savings for your own care, has to change, as it's not right.
Ultimately, at the next election, it looks like all of Burnham's plans will be detailed in a manifesto and we can decide. I know he could be another liar, but he is at least sounding genuine and passionate about the change that is needed. [Post edited 29 Sep 20:46]
|
He's misleading people already if you think people won't have to give up their houses to receive social care. That would be phenomenally expensive. Where would the money come from to replace the hundreds of thousands of pounds that it can cost per person?
In 1999 the government (Labour) set up the Sutherland Commission to look at setting up the same thing as this National Care Service. When they looked at it they decided it was too expensive, so the idea was binned. That was in 1999 when the country was much better off and running a much lower deficit. God knows how we're supposed to be able to afford it now - probably by lying about the true costs. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.