Mr Burnham contradicts himself whilst taking wrong turnings

Mr Burnham says he believes he will get more growth and prosperity if he devolves more power to Regional mayors and if he nationalises more industries. These are two wrong turnings.

He immediately contradicts himself by saying when it comes to tackling homelessness, his first priority, he needs to take powers away from Mayors  and local government in order to enforce a uniform and effective national policy. When  is he going to do that to show he means business with his stated prime aim?

He has also discovered that pressing for full nationalisation is too expensive. A wish to build hundreds of thousands of Council homes has been changed to hundreds of thousands of social or affordable homes not in Council  ownership, presumably  owing to cost and the  inability of Councils  to get things done. A passion to nationalise Thanes Water comes up against a nationalised version having large capital needs to build more reservoirs and treatment works which the Chancellor cannot afford.

Mr Burnham ignores  just how bad our nationalised industries  are. The Post Office secured the imprisonment of many key staff on false charges of fraud and now needs taxpayers to pay  large compensation bills. British Steel is losing £1.3 m a day with no plan of how to sort it out and save the blast furnaces. Indeed, the government wants to close them for net zero reasons, leading to the loss of many jobs they say they wish to save! HS 2 is an enormous cash sink, running way  over original budget and more than 10 years delayed.

So what is the attraction of nationalisation? When will Mr Burnham admit we cannot afford more  of it?

53 Comments

  1. Lifelogic
    September 2, 2026

    Indeed Burnham has a broken compass 180 degrees out on every single issue. Nearly all PMs from John Major onwards have had it so.

    £1 off bus fares, misplaced hope in every heart, a rapist, knife man and a platitude for every postcode, doom loop economic policies, tax borrow and piss down the drain so what could go wrong?

    YouGov survey:-

    Most important issues for voters in order of importance. Immigration 50% Europe 12% did Burnham get the order reversed?

    Immigration, Economy, Defence, Crime, Health, Welfare, Environment, Housing Tax, Europe

    MORE worthless Burnham platitudes did not even make the list nor did Thatcher!

    Reply
    1. Ian B
      September 2, 2026

      @Lifelogic – he embodies Socialism as a religion not out of common sense or logic. He could have everything, if only there was a thriving economy to pay for it. These Socialist confuse on contrived taxes as something they earn not something they steal.

      Reply
      1. Lifelogic
        September 3, 2026

        Exactly – and something the steal this year that will throttle the tax base for next year.

        Reply
  2. Andrew Jones
    September 2, 2026

    Assuming no election gamble we are potentially rid of this government in a couple of years and a few months. If you look at all the hot air on housing in 2024 vs now hardly anything has been done, in effect their policies have worked against builders.

    Burnham and co are no match for the current bond yields which will only get worse. Pull up a chair and try and enjoy the show.

    Reply
  3. Lofelogic
    September 2, 2026

    So Starmer resigns paying tribute to an ex dire MP for Holborn

    I use to live just round the corner from the British Museum and Frank Dobson’s hugely subsidised council flat (I had had to buy my inferior flat at full market price. He never gave it up for someone more in need needless to say. He even had another large home outside London. I have never voted Labour or LibDim in my life but if I still lived in Bloomsbury I might now have have had to vote Labour just keep the mad, antisemitic, class A drugs for all. green nutters out. Such is FPTP voting.

    Dobson was a dire health minister too despite two Tier’s tribute but perhaps not quite as dire as the current lot.

    Reply
    1. Peter
      September 2, 2026

      Starmer will get a well paid sinecure for his service and he won’t have to return to the scene of his failures.

      Reply
  4. Lifelogic
    September 2, 2026

    So what is the attraction of nationalisation?

    Union subsidies for the Labour Party surely – I assume? It is clearly the complete reverse of what is needed for economic growth.

    Reply
  5. Lifelogic
    September 2, 2026

    Mr Burnham ignores just how bad our nationalised industries are.

    Indeed add to your list Rail, the NHS, NHS dentistry, state housing, prisons, the BoE, water regulators, the energy sector polices and management, defence and defence procurement, HS2, the benefit systems, banking regulation, social service, nuclear power, the road network, English Nature, Rewilding, the farm management systems, all the net zero lunacy…

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      September 2, 2026

      Hopeless at just regulating things too.

      Reply
    2. Hat man
      September 2, 2026

      LL: Britain already has a higher proportion of prisoners in private prisons than the USA. They are reported to be more overcrowded on average than state-owned prisons. I don’t think I’d want to be imprisoned by a profit-making institution.

      Reply
      1. Berkshire Alan
        September 2, 2026

        Hat Man
        Family member worked for a Private Prison Company, I can assure you that the buildings were far more fit for purpose than the very old buildings owned by the State, also more attempts to re-habilitate the prisoners through carefully thought out in house work programmes.
        Think they we less costly to the State (taxpayer) than running its own Prisons.

        Reply
  6. Sakara Gold
    September 2, 2026

    Over the past four years, the national average household water bill in England and Wales has risen by 57%, climbing from £408 in 2021/22 to £639 in 2026/27. This represents an average cash increase of £231 per household

    Source:- ukwaterbills,co.uk

    Exactly zero major new reservoirs have been completed in England over the past four years. In fact, no major reservoir has been built since 1992. Meanwhile, hosepipe bans have been enforced in three of the past four years.

    The vast majority of recent bill increases has been used to pay the interest on their huge borrowings, massive bonuses for senior management, golden handshakes and paying Environment Agency prosecution fines

    Despite the stonking increases in water bills, there has clearly been no improvement in the raw sewage dumping situation. The bill paying public is being taken for a ride. Any profits made from the industry are used to pay stonking dividends to the foreign shareholders.

    Reply No mention of huge Thames tideway tunnel in London to increase capacity, Havant reservoir in build etc. The Thames Water large investment programme is the reason Burnham is backing off nationalising as all that cost then falls on taxpayers.

    Reply
    1. Ed M
      September 2, 2026

      Average Annual Household Bill (£)*
      England £603
      France £470
      Italy £420
      Spain £340

      Major Reservoirs Built Since 1990*
      England 1
      France 10
      Italy 8
      Spain 18

      Reply
      1. glen cullen
        September 2, 2026

        Yeah ….but those other countries aren’t taking net-zero serious

        Reply
    2. Philip P.
      September 2, 2026

      Reply to reply: The Havant reservoir is not a Thames Water project, and the Tideway tunnel is a sewer, not a reservoir. And surely we cannot accept your/the water companies’ argument: ‘Let us go on price-gouging consumers, or you’ll have to pay even more if you nationalise us’?

      Reply did not say Havant was a Thames Water project, knowing the geography.Of course the Tideway tunnel is not a reservoir! The clue is in the name.

      Reply
    3. Original Richard
      September 2, 2026

      I blame the regulators.

      Reply
      1. Ed M
        September 2, 2026

        Our companeros, in the land of Don Quixote, pay average water bill of £340 versus £603 here in England.
        Whilst since 1990, Spain has built 18 reservoirs versus just one in England.
        Whilst 70% of our water management is owned by foreign entities. In Spain, it’s about 35%.
        To me this isn’t just a matter money and the relatively awful way our water is being managed compared to say a country such as Spain but also a matter of sovereignty. It’s crazy that foreign entities can own more than 50% of our water management. Out of principle, should be a maximum of 49%.
        Don Quixote could do a better job than what’s going on here in England with our water. Although I know many people are not amused by the hefty water bills they are paying and for what they are receiving in return.

        Reply
      2. Ed M
        September 2, 2026

        Scots pay £100 less per year water than here in England.
        Scottish water 100% government owned.
        So to what degree has privatisation failed English ‘customers’ or not over water? I don’t know. Parliament should be having this debate (if it hasn’t already – I don’t know).
        (I’m a capitalist but I think we need to be ruthless in using capitalism as a tool when it clearly works and ruling it out when it clearly does not work – for lazy, greedy fat cats in the private sector is just as bad a lazy, greedy, fat cats in the public sector!)

        Reply Scotland got one thing right about water. It allows competition for business users, with several good competition companies. England should introduce competition for all customers.

        Reply
      3. Ed M
        September 2, 2026

        On the other hand, renationalising English water would cost too much.
        So for now, I guess we’re stuck with it (with big problem with English water whether it were nationalised or not).

        Reply
  7. davews
    September 2, 2026

    SWR trains became part of the new GBR nationalised service in May 2025. 16 months later you wouldn’t know. Same late and unreliable trains and just one in the new GBR livery, although admittedly their new 701 trains are now finally in full service. If he expects he can do the same with the other industries he wants to nationalise, heaven help us.

    Reply
  8. Wonderer
    September 2, 2026

    Somebody should also point out to him the difference which Thatcher’s era made to his home city, Liverpool, despite all the rhetoric.

    Reply
    1. Lifelogic
      September 2, 2026

      These types work on emotion and envy, logic, facts, numbers and reason does not get anywhere with them. Hence Net Zero and their doom loop economic agenda.

      Reply
    2. Peter
      September 2, 2026

      W,

      ‘Managed decline’?

      Reply
  9. Old Albion
    September 2, 2026

    He could afford to do many things if he cancelled the Chagos sell-out. Circa £30 billion to be handed over to Mauritius. Madness.

    Reply
    1. Mark B
      September 2, 2026

      +1

      Reply
    2. Lifelogic
      September 2, 2026

      Surely the US can stop this give away to China lunacy?

      Reply
    3. Original Richard
      September 2, 2026

      And Net Zero.

      Reply
    4. glen cullen
      September 2, 2026

      Sadly I believe the Chagos deal is alive and still a mainstream policy of this government ….Its being reported that Burnham is meeting with Mauritus as early as next week

      Reply
  10. Berkshire Alan
    September 2, 2026

    I did not listen to his speech because he was still a child in the 1970’s, so he does not have a clue what it was like in reality, then we had 25% inflation, 17% mortgage rates to name but two.
    I think the markets will eventually sort him out but in the meantime we are all in for more taxation pain until he has gone.

    Reply
    1. Peter
      September 2, 2026

      BA,
      It will be interesting to see how his popularity fares in polls. So far he seems to be doing OK on that score, but is still early days.

      Reply
  11. Narrow Shoulders
    September 2, 2026

    Nationalisation and devolution are now the answer to England’s ills.

    Choice and competition are.

    Water privatisation and rail privatisation did not introduce choice and competition. Telecoms and Gas and Electricity did.

    Reply
  12. JP
    September 2, 2026

    We learn on the Andrew Neil Show the budget in October will be small and the government will wait for the results of the spending review next year. Further confirmation this government is unable to understand the urgency required with bond yields rising to record levels. Mr Burnham has made the wrong diagnosis and continues down the wrong road.

    Reply
  13. Mark B
    September 2, 2026

    Good morning.

    I hear form elsewhere that the new PM has finally attended to HoC after some 42 days. Shows you what he thinks of the, Mother of all Parliaments.

    The Left, especially the Looney-Left, just cannot get over the fact that Mrs.T beat them, not once, not twice, but three times. She crushed the Trade Unions, especially the NUM, and left this country in a far better state than which she found it. But in the mind of people like the PM, everything is, and always will be, her fault. All this despite there being a Labour government for 13 years and nominally Left leaning Conservative government there after. If none of the forementioned in their time in office could have righted the supposed wrongs of Thatcherism, it really highlights their uselessness. But alas, few will ever see or mention that.

    Reply
  14. Rod Evans
    September 2, 2026

    What we saw yesterday in Parliament was Burnham in person trying to present a human face to socialist dogma. His greatest mistake is to imagine Mayors are more capable of efficient use of tax payers money than government agencies.
    The strange feature of that policy in almost supported by the legacy failure of state controlled projects from trail to roads to energy and too many other areas of failure to list. Mayors represent individual authority which is where he is grounded having held the role for Manchester these past years. It is the mindset of a dictator choosing to deploy fellow dictators that worship at the same altar of totalitarian authority he considers essential for national success.
    During his performance yesterday in Parliament, I could not escape from thinking how Stalin-esque a figure he presented maybe Chairman Xi, in a more up to date image.
    A devolved Cornwall is his solution to regional economic decline to be followed by devolved everywhere when socialist policy has driven previously wealthy regional into poverty.
    It is good to know he will not be controlled by the bond markets. His refusal to understand the mess his party has created, will ensure we have a snap general election this year and we can be rid of this insane socialist government.

    Reply
  15. Keith from Leeds
    September 2, 2026

    Sadly, our new PM shows what a clunker he is on his first appearance in the House. If he thinks Thatcher and Brexit are the problem, then he is a first-class idiot. As I said previously he majors in the minors!
    Burnham is exactly what we don’t need at this critical time for the UK.

    Reply
  16. Ian B
    September 2, 2026

    So in a nutshell the State needs to spend more money on Mayors, Devolution the things no one is asking for so as to bring the cost of living down

    Reply
  17. Steve Bullion
    September 2, 2026

    Nationalisation will only appear to be working when the state finally bankrupts itself by following ideology along side tax and spend as government objectives. Then people will be glad there are still some national organisations that still operate because any financer with any spare money will have emigrated to a better environment.

    Burnham is clearly grasping at straws because he now has to do the impossible – coming in as new PM so many expect miracles of him, if only to save the labour party from extinction. Unfortunately he has already shown the limits of what he can do. It’s not an unwillingness to share his plans for economic revival with us, he simply doesn’t have any – the only objectives he has mean more pain and more taxes.

    Reply
  18. Derek
    September 2, 2026

    I was stunned when Burnham blamed the 1980s for the problems of today. 1980s were the decade when Mrs Thatcher turned around the fortunes of OUR country after it had been decimated by years of rampant socialism.
    She and her Cabinet converted the UK from being ‘the sick man of Europe’ to the wonder of the world.
    It seems Mr Burnham believes the socialist policies of the 1970s are the way to go now. Help us, God, or the Bond markets!
    Now, what is the definition of insanity?

    Reply
  19. Ian B
    September 2, 2026

    Spending other peoples money is always good in the run up to the election, even better just ‘promise’ to spend

    Reply
  20. beresford
    September 2, 2026

    In fairness a number of the privatised industries are a disaster as well. Prioritising large payouts to directors and shareholders over investment in infrastructure.

    Reply
  21. a-tracy
    September 2, 2026

    Because the UK foolishly gave away our golden shares in essential, ex-nationalised industries, other nations and other countries’ pension schemes investing in our water industry, as an example, benefit from the dividends of privatisation. Whereas there is little return to the Exchequer or investment in Scottish state-owned water, yet no one notices; surely, if they spend equal sums, then the taxpayer should have benefited equally from the dividend return. Water is cheaper to provide in Scotland because there is so much of it. It even rained this summer, and the grass is still green up there. Relatives in Scotland say they save money on their bills, so all are dividend-receiving owners taking their dividend tax-free in lower-priced water. So that seems to be a big benefit of nationalisation. Does Scottish Water get any subsidy at all from the UK?

    Reply
  22. glen cullen
    September 2, 2026

    Why didn’t Kemi mention, (1) Regional Mayors (2) Police Crime Commissioners (3) Net-Zero & (4) Immigration ….the topics that everyone (us plebs) are talking about

    Reply
  23. Original Richard
    September 2, 2026

    Me. Burnham will continue with the current policies as socialism depends upon making and keeping people poor. Net zero is the perfect vehicle for this aim because the spending of any amount of money can be justified when it is to save the planet.

    Reply
  24. Sidney Ingleby
    September 2, 2026

    As with some of our recent senior politicians Burnham parades in a coat of many colours.Probably
    a Jacobite at heart.Interestingly:he appears to be hell-bent on tying us intoBrussels regardless of
    the cost and loss of independence.This when President Trump is shifting his focus from
    MAGA to MASA.That resonates with Mom and Pop USA(ignoring BBC/CBS bias).Putin has no
    need to issue threats.Burnham will render UK armless/harmless faster than Moscow can press
    the button

    Reply
    1. Peter
      September 2, 2026

      SI,
      A Jacobite? How did you come to that conclusion?

      Reply
      1. Sidney Ingleby
        September 3, 2026

        the original wearer

        Reply
  25. Original Richard
    September 2, 2026

    Surely the question should be how much longer can we afford the rampant socialism and Net Zero de-industrialisation we’ve had for the last 3 decades?

    Reply
    1. glen cullen
      September 2, 2026

      We’re leading the world …..and thats what counts if your next job is with the UN

      Reply
  26. Original Richard
    September 2, 2026

    The attraction of nationalisation is that the industries can be run down even more quickly so as to hasten the reduction of our territorial emissions of CO2. Once this has been achieved the real goal of net zeroing our consumption emissions will be much easier to achieve.

    Reply
  27. Roy Grainger
    September 2, 2026

    He might get more growth if he devolved all tax-raising powers to the regions and allowed them to compete against each other for investment and workforce and residents. But of course that isn’t what he wants at all.

    Reply
  28. MBJ
    September 2, 2026

    I suppose we need to sit back a little while he learns his job. In a new job there are many things a new employee would like to change but are met with resistance and realities.
    I do feel in many cases a mayor with local decisions and access to a budget is not ideal and open to corruption. Persuaded by money and a few letters at the back of names the gullible join the downward spiral of agreeing with the more powerful rather than a simple analysis of local needs.In law this can mean a local hanging party ( not to be taken literally by those who don’t have a sufficient command of metaphor)
    I don’t pretend to understand large finance and is why I initially read John’s blogs,but I can see problems caused by people who are not able to effect beneficial change.

    Reply
    1. Peter Gardner
      September 3, 2026

      Sitting back would be an option if Burnham refrained from doing anything at all until deemed competent. But he is doing lots and all of it wrong and damaging.

      Reply
  29. Peter Gardner
    September 3, 2026

    One thing is certain. As EU instigated projects, HS2 and Net Zero are sacrosanct.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *