| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? 11:46 - Jul 18 with 1735 views | pointofblue |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/art
Yes, we theoretically vote for the party/individual MP and not the leader, but when something is so clearly against what the public supposedly voted for at the last election, should Burnham really seek a fresh mandate before making these calls? |  |
| |  |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:03 - Jul 18 with 1515 views | Guthrum |
Would that, then, rob the government of the ability to repond to crises or changes of circumstances, if they had to hold a General Election every time?
Not to mention the expense of doing so, given that all administrations either ignore parts of the manifestoes they were elected under, or change course multiple times. And how far down do you go? Would minor changes in how business paperwork is handled be cause for triggering a GE? Who deciodes which issues are of significant moment? |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:12 - Jul 18 with 1481 views | pointofblue |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:03 - Jul 18 by Guthrum |
Would that, then, rob the government of the ability to repond to crises or changes of circumstances, if they had to hold a General Election every time?
Not to mention the expense of doing so, given that all administrations either ignore parts of the manifestoes they were elected under, or change course multiple times. And how far down do you go? Would minor changes in how business paperwork is handled be cause for triggering a GE? Who deciodes which issues are of significant moment? |
I guess it depends how far Burnham goes - how far he rips up the 2024 manifesto and tries again. If it's a completely different approach to the one which the election win was based on in 2024, then I can understand why people may start asking questions.
I have to admit this particular policy gets to me. The planet is warming up and out reaction is to dig for more oil and gas? There is just no care or respect anymore. A desperation for short term solutions without thinking about long term problems. | |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:16 - Jul 18 with 1469 views | TheMoralMajority |
I don't think many people voted for labour for their manifesto. They voted for them because they weren't the Torys (to swerve your question entirely) |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:20 - Jul 18 with 1442 views | J2BLUE |
We have seen that politicians and parties say one thing in opposition and then do a 180 as soon as they get power.
They then get questioned on it and use that trained trademark political tone to tell the interviewer what the public wants which is often complete BS. |  | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:24 - Jul 18 with 1408 views | RadioOrwell |
No. |  | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:28 - Jul 18 with 1387 views | NthQldITFC |
Much as I'm disappointed by this decision, no, because pragmatism. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:35 - Jul 18 with 1370 views | urbanpenguin |
To be fair, Starmer spent his whole short period going against his own manifesto and pledges. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:45 - Jul 18 with 1330 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
No.
Because the people calling for a GE now, weren't calling for one when we had Johnson/Truss/Sunack in quick succession. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:57 - Jul 18 with 1293 views | Swansea_Blue |
I don’t see how this is against their last manifesto. They promised no new licences whereas this is looking to expedite drilling for existing licences. Although it becomes a bit of a grey area with the fields in questions because of legal challenges to the granted licences.
I don’t think it’s the right thing to do at all, but politically I don’t see the problem. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 13:06 - Jul 18 with 1259 views | GlasgowBlue |
Burnham said that the Tories should have done so when Truss took over from Johnson. So it’s hypocritical that he won’t call an election.
But constitutionally he doesn’t have to do so and the last thing this country needs is more political turmoil and upheaval. I’m not particularly happy with the way he was parachuted into the job, but we can’t keep changing pM’s every two years so I’d rather he just got on with the job. And this time next year, if he’s as unpopular as Starmer was then Labour MPs just have to hold their nerve and stick with him. There are no short term solutions in politics. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 13:19 - Jul 18 with 1224 views | Swansea_Blue |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 13:06 - Jul 18 by GlasgowBlue |
Burnham said that the Tories should have done so when Truss took over from Johnson. So it’s hypocritical that he won’t call an election.
But constitutionally he doesn’t have to do so and the last thing this country needs is more political turmoil and upheaval. I’m not particularly happy with the way he was parachuted into the job, but we can’t keep changing pM’s every two years so I’d rather he just got on with the job. And this time next year, if he’s as unpopular as Starmer was then Labour MPs just have to hold their nerve and stick with him. There are no short term solutions in politics. |
I’m not too bothered about changing direction if ultimately it improves things. Instability leading to better outcomes is better than stability and stagnation imo. We’d have been nuts to stick with Truss for example. Sticking with Starmer would have been like sticking with Mick in his last year or so - just going through the motions because of a lack of imagination. Of course, there’s always the chance Burnham could do a Hurst   | |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 14:35 - Jul 18 with 1076 views | jayessess |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:57 - Jul 18 by Swansea_Blue |
I don’t see how this is against their last manifesto. They promised no new licences whereas this is looking to expedite drilling for existing licences. Although it becomes a bit of a grey area with the fields in questions because of legal challenges to the granted licences.
I don’t think it’s the right thing to do at all, but politically I don’t see the problem. |
Bit of a "technically speaking" defence that one.
Generally speaking I don't have much problem with governments diverging from their manifestoes. Doing so is on their own heads, if the public don't like it and feels mislead, well that's what the next election is for.
I think it's daft politically. They likely need c50% of the people who are currently supporting the Green Party to vote for them in the next election, so I'm not sure why they think it's a good signal to send to those people (especially when nobody seems to think the new licences will do anything much to bring energy prices down). |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 14:46 - Jul 18 with 1048 views | Wheels |
Labour got 33.7% of the vote. Delivering their manifesto to the letter goes against what the vast majority of public voted for. They have a mandate from our FPTP system but not from the public, and same goes for all but 2 of the governments we've had. So they don't need a fresh mandate because they never had one in the first place. | | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 14:51 - Jul 18 with 1030 views | Swansea_Blue |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 14:35 - Jul 18 by jayessess |
Bit of a "technically speaking" defence that one.
Generally speaking I don't have much problem with governments diverging from their manifestoes. Doing so is on their own heads, if the public don't like it and feels mislead, well that's what the next election is for.
I think it's daft politically. They likely need c50% of the people who are currently supporting the Green Party to vote for them in the next election, so I'm not sure why they think it's a good signal to send to those people (especially when nobody seems to think the new licences will do anything much to bring energy prices down). |
I was only thinking in terms of legitimacy and remit being ok, but yes good point - in terms of political image and campaigning it’s a strange one. As are their immigration reforms under Mahmood too. It is a technicality in a way but that’s how they all work. “No new licences” always left the door open to maximising production on existing licences. At the time of the manifesto, I think both of the fields in question had been granted licences. There’s a good argument that since these licences were ruled illegal in 2025 that any new approvals count as ‘new licences’. No doubt they’d argue they’re old licences as they were in place during the election.
Political semantics maybe? More importantly imo, it’s not what we should be doing morally, I don’t think it’s even particularly viable economically, as these sources are mostly depleted. And yes I agree that it sends the wrong signal to lost voters and former party members. | |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 15:13 - Jul 18 with 969 views | jayessess |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 14:51 - Jul 18 by Swansea_Blue |
I was only thinking in terms of legitimacy and remit being ok, but yes good point - in terms of political image and campaigning it’s a strange one. As are their immigration reforms under Mahmood too. It is a technicality in a way but that’s how they all work. “No new licences” always left the door open to maximising production on existing licences. At the time of the manifesto, I think both of the fields in question had been granted licences. There’s a good argument that since these licences were ruled illegal in 2025 that any new approvals count as ‘new licences’. No doubt they’d argue they’re old licences as they were in place during the election.
Political semantics maybe? More importantly imo, it’s not what we should be doing morally, I don’t think it’s even particularly viable economically, as these sources are mostly depleted. And yes I agree that it sends the wrong signal to lost voters and former party members. |
Falling into the same trap as the last guy of believing that antagonising significant parts of your own support base is a mark of "seriousness" and will result in significant gains amongst "normal people". | |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 16:08 - Jul 18 with 883 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:03 - Jul 18 by Guthrum |
Would that, then, rob the government of the ability to repond to crises or changes of circumstances, if they had to hold a General Election every time?
Not to mention the expense of doing so, given that all administrations either ignore parts of the manifestoes they were elected under, or change course multiple times. And how far down do you go? Would minor changes in how business paperwork is handled be cause for triggering a GE? Who deciodes which issues are of significant moment? |
I think there should be more accountability to be held to manifesto promises but it has to allow for what you describe. I am not sure what the answer is. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 16:15 - Jul 18 with 851 views | bluelagos |
To move away from the manifesto is clearly undemocratic - and legitimises those who call for an election pointing out Burnham has no mandate.
It is of course ironic that those on the right calling for an election are also supporters of this new policy - but it is undeniably a move away from the manifesto Labour MPs were elected on.
Whether the move away from the manifesto is serious enough I guess is a personal view/opinion - but am far from impressed tbh. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 16:57 - Jul 18 with 787 views | flykickingbybgunn |
I think that a change of Prime Minister should warrant an election if they fail to abide by the manifesto.
Having said that it is difficult to foresee all the problems that may come in the next 5 years so some slack is needed.
In just the same way that if an MP changes party should cause a by election.
Especially when we have the currently undemocratic FPTP system. |  | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 17:50 - Jul 18 with 727 views | DJR |
I thought this in the latest Private Eye was funny.
Message from Lord Gnome
We are proud to announce the opening of Private Eye North, our new Northern hub, bringing devolution to the over-centralised business of satirical journalism.
....
Private Eye North will be located above a fish and chip shop in heart of Makerfield. Lord Gnome will work there one day a week to ensure a regional balance of cartoon strips and lookalikes combined with a non-metrocentric mix of investigations, puns and crossword clues.
It may take ten years for Private Eye North to be fully up and running but we're asking you to bear with us as we go on a journey together - back to London, as fast as possible. [Post edited 18 Jul 17:50]
|  | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 18:18 - Jul 18 with 679 views | Swansea_Blue |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 16:15 - Jul 18 by bluelagos |
To move away from the manifesto is clearly undemocratic - and legitimises those who call for an election pointing out Burnham has no mandate.
It is of course ironic that those on the right calling for an election are also supporters of this new policy - but it is undeniably a move away from the manifesto Labour MPs were elected on.
Whether the move away from the manifesto is serious enough I guess is a personal view/opinion - but am far from impressed tbh. |
I don't see how it's a move away from their manifesto (if it's all as reported in the BBC article). All he's suggesting is speeding up plans for extraction where there are existing licences, which was specifically allowed for in thir manifesto. Although obviously there's the issue with the two fields where licences were ruled illegal by the courts in 2025. Yet those fields were on the table at the time of the manifesto, so it's not straightforward.
I don't like the focus on oil and gas (it's braodly criminal tbh), but I think a very strong case can be made that this is within the remit of their manifesto. Unless I'm completely misreading the BBC article and have things arse about face. | |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 18:24 - Jul 18 with 648 views | J2BLUE |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 14:46 - Jul 18 by Wheels |
Labour got 33.7% of the vote. Delivering their manifesto to the letter goes against what the vast majority of public voted for. They have a mandate from our FPTP system but not from the public, and same goes for all but 2 of the governments we've had. So they don't need a fresh mandate because they never had one in the first place. |
People post this sort of thing thinking it sounds clever. It doesn't. Everyone knows how the system works. Should it be changed? Yes, PR is the fair way, but this is how it is for now so posts like this are just pointless. | | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 18:24 - Jul 18 with 647 views | ronnyd |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 12:20 - Jul 18 by J2BLUE |
We have seen that politicians and parties say one thing in opposition and then do a 180 as soon as they get power.
They then get questioned on it and use that trained trademark political tone to tell the interviewer what the public wants which is often complete BS. |
It's easy for parties to say that they can do this and that when they're not making those decisions. Once they are in power to do ,it they realise that there is not much they can do, as they are hamstrung by the same constraints that the previous lot had. | | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 19:29 - Jul 18 with 561 views | Geomorph |
Using the early 21st century as a guide.. no |  | | |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 19:33 - Jul 18 with 552 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
Can anyone name a single government in our history that stuck to their manifesto promises?
These calls are just nonsense, from people with an agenda and nothing more. Certainly no fears about mandates or being undemocratic. |  |
| |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 20:23 - Jul 18 with 495 views | bluelagos |
| If the new PM is going against the last manifesto, should there be an election? on 18:18 - Jul 18 by Swansea_Blue |
I don't see how it's a move away from their manifesto (if it's all as reported in the BBC article). All he's suggesting is speeding up plans for extraction where there are existing licences, which was specifically allowed for in thir manifesto. Although obviously there's the issue with the two fields where licences were ruled illegal by the courts in 2025. Yet those fields were on the table at the time of the manifesto, so it's not straightforward.
I don't like the focus on oil and gas (it's braodly criminal tbh), but I think a very strong case can be made that this is within the remit of their manifesto. Unless I'm completely misreading the BBC article and have things arse about face. |
Labour having talked about their commitments to reaching net zero for years and are now seemingly going to sign off on new oil/gas development.
It is clearly a shift in policy and to pretend it isn't is ridiculous.
If people are happy with that, that's for them. I'm not.
But it's cool, we are.allowed to have different opinions and it doesn't worry me that other people may see it differently. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
