The Labour Conference Presents: Andy Burnham’s Crying Game.

The bullshit flies thick and fast as the latest Dear Leader weeps.

Above: the pained expression of the professional sociopath pretending to have feelings.

So in the UK we have just had the Labour Party conference. Party conference season is a bizarre spectacle.

It’s where you get a sense of just how fourth rate the whole thing is. It’s better for realising that your nation is a joke than a police diversity awareness training course or the potholes on the road.

The truth is that most of us have completely stopped giving a shit. I don’t know what the viewing figures for these conferences look like these days, but the vast majority of us, even the politically engaged, don’t tune in. I’m not sure any of the people attending do either.

The whole thing reeks of those shows put on by overweight thirty something children’s entertainers to an empty room at holiday camps in the winter season. What is the fucking point? Who actually cares anymore?

We all know that the only people who attend are the most deluded freaks in the party membership who don’t have any kind of real life. Regardless of party they tend to be the same type of person. Brian, 67, who has never touched a woman. Margaret, a short haired 47 year old NHS nurse who has touched an awful lot of women. Between these two extremes are the late middle aged couples who bring a thermos with them and a homemade selection of sandwiches wrapped in tinfoil and then settle down in exactly the same postures they adopt on a windy seafront while watching the seagulls and stoically chewing a ham and cheese with particles of sand in it.

And then there are a few younger ambitious types. The 21 year old student with a stall about the wonders of genital mutilation or the ‘genocide in Gaza’ or whatever other fatuous lunacy is flavour of the month in NUS campus politics.

Normal people don’t come anywhere near the average party conference, let’s be honest about this.

But the whole fucking circus is still treated as if it matters by the fourth rate creeps who get up on the podiums and the fourth rate creeps who write articles for the equally dying and irrelevant and worthless mainstream media. It’s 40 years or more since an election gave a real choice, and this season of standing ovations for turgid crap still rolls on.

So I’ll dip my toes in the waters of farce at the extreme shallow end of the death of a nation and share a few words on Andy Burnham’s Conference speech. What did the installed puppet of the Globalist Blob have to burble and belch?

The Emotional Highlights

Let’s deal first with the bit that is supposed to tug our heartstrings, show what a genuine Real Boy this wooden cunt is, and form the tear jerking emotional core of the shitty soap opera that is the Rise of Andy Burnham.

Let’s deal with the synthetic, awful, chillingly cynical presentation of Andy’s Dead Dad….a tellingly foul escalation of Kier Starmer’s revolting ‘my father the toolmaker’ reflex.

Whenever a globalist, leftist politician mentions their family, ‘gets emotional’, ‘fights back tears’, tells us how Dad gave them their values, tells us how much they owe to their family, gets dewy eyed talking about their partner, their kids, their parents…..

I just don’t buy a fucking word of it.

I genuinely don’t think these people have any real human connections.

Sorry, no, I’m not buying that.

If they had human emotions they couldn’t be who they are and do what they do.

It’s all fake.

It’s all bullshit.

Everything around them is there to be used.

I think they stand in front of a mirror practicing the trembling lip and the ten second pause.

I think they would feed every person they ever knew into a woodchipper if it got them a two point bounce in the polls.

They don’t have heroes. They don’t love their parents. They don’t love their children. They don’t love their wives. They don’t support football teams. They don’t have normal interests. They don’t have hobbies. They don’t grieve or care or feel a thing.

They are sociopaths who know they must mimic these things, like aliens from some remorseless first wave of infiltrating invasion.

“What is this Earth thing you call….love?”

I think they are about as likely to have loved anyone as Hermann Goering was…..possibly less.

I think Burnham fucking sat in a little team huddle and said “Dad’s death….can we use it?”.

I really do.

Blair’s coffee cups with the kids photos. Obama’s Michelle and the kids stories. Starmer’s ’my father was a toolmaker’.

Now Andy fights back the tears.

Yeah…..no.

Call me cynical. Call me heartless.

I don’t buy it.

I don’t for one second think any of them are capable of normal human connections.

‘Grief’ and family are just two more tools in the cold hard game.

Andy Burnham is the guy who did his absolute best to cover up people dying of neglect in NHS corridors. These were people who were left in the middle of hospitals lying on the floor. These were people who died of neglect including thirst, malnutrition and being left lying in excrement and urine. When Andy Burnham was Health Secretary in the Blair government between 2005-2009 the Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust Health Scandal occurred. The Francis Inquiry found that patients were so neglected that some were left drinking water from flower pots in a desperate attempt to stay alive. One man with a broken hip was left in a chair for 22 hours. Food and drink were deliberately placed out of reach of patients.

It went beyond neglect into the realms of sadistic torture. Placing food and water out of reach on purpose mirrors the Ancient Greek mythic punishment of Tantalus.

Tantalus was described in such a position in the Greek version of Hell.

Up to 1,200 patients died after suffering this kind of neglect and abuse.

How did Andy Burnham respond to this horror?

Not with tears. He was less lachrymose about the suffering of OTHER families. What he did was block a full statutory public inquiry, refuse to meet with victims families, and put the protection of the reputation of the hospitals involved (and the government) above the truth, above justice, and above the lives and deaths of the victims.

He tried to bury the bad news.

He had been the person who approved cost-cutting measures in 2007 that partly led to the deaths. He was the person who pressured the Care Quality Commission to tone down criticism of failing hospitals in order to avoid headlines damaging to the government prior to the 2010 election.

Andy’s record on the mass rape of white children is very similar. While serving as the Mayoral authority over Manchester policing, he approved Operation Hexagon, a Manchester police attempt to cover up the gang rapes of white children by Muslim men by silencing and harassing whistleblowers who were exposing these rapes.

Today, we are supposed to think that Andy’s tears are genuine.

That a man with this record has feelings.

Feelings that were never shown and never felt when people were dying in corridors or when children were being tortured and raped, but are shown and are ‘felt’ when he’s giving a Conference speech and telling us how much his Dad meant to him.

It’s just the Crying Game.

None of it is real. The actions when others suffered show the true nature of the man.

The Hope

The other big emotional counterpoint of the speech was of course Andy’s favourite word: Hope.

Andy is all about telling us how much Hope he is going to give us.

After all, it’s far easier to promise the immaterial and abstract delivery of hope, than it is to deliver material and real things the general public actually want and are demanding.

If Andy ever achieves a single decent thing the only thing it could be would be this: if he keeps on this way, there is some ‘hope’ that Andy will deliver the death-blow to the Idiocracy tactic of the One Word Slogan.

The slogan, the fatuous, summing it up, reducing it down, boilerplate promise has of course always been present in politics. To some extent it’s unavoidable, and there are examples I rather like (MAGA, for instance).

But there is a difference between the sincere slogan that genuinely expresses something a candidate wants to achieve (and stripping that down to a catchy, memorable, campaign-friendly phrase) and the sheer rampant dishonesty, cynicism and stupidity of a vast, all-encompassing one word abstract that doesn’t mean a fucking thing.

Hope is the new Change. Burnham wants Hope to do for him what Change did for Obama and Blair.

Bit when you reduce an entire political identity, an entire promise to the electorate, into these one word abstracts you are really signalling the utter emptiness of your platform, the meaningless nothing that is your value system, and the depth either of your stupidity or your cynicism in thinking the One Word means a damn thing at all. Is Change always good? Of course it fucking isn’t. What Change are you talking about? What measures do you mean? How do we know you won’t change the things we actually want to preserve and protect? What are the costs of this Change? What are the potential dangers?

Hope is even more empty and vacuous.

It’s the promise of a feeling, stripped of meaning and context.

And the really sick thing about is that the person expressing this vacuity is one of the architects of our LACK of hope.

If you are any kind of sane person you have less hope for the UK now than you ever had before.

We KNOW there isn’t a fucking chance in hell that an emoty, soulless, sociopathic fourth rate nothing like Burnham will improve ANYTHING.

We KNOW that nothing works in this country.

We KNOW that Burnham won’t change any of the policies that need changing or deliver any of policies that would create REAL hope rather then it’s imaginary, fictive and constant invocation.

Can we hope that this installed puppet with his NPC robot opinions will suddenly get the economy roaring into life? If we do, we are fucking retarded.

Can we hope that this Prime Minister and this government will stop mass immigration, protect our borders, and prioritise the safety and prosperity of our own citizens? Of course not.

Can we hope that Andy will address two tier policing, restore colour blind sentencing, end the judicial activism of Hard Left judges, and make some genuine effort to endure equality before the law and similar treatment of white or right wing protest movements to that received by BAME, Muslim and left wing protestors? Of course not.

Can we hope that Andy will honour our votes, respect our voices, treat decisions we make or referendums we win as valid? Well one of the very few stark and clear policy directions is a big, bold, elitist Fuck You to everyone who voted for Brexit, so good luck there.

Unless you are an absolute moron or a core, immovable Labour voter (yes, I’m aware it’s the same thing) having Andy Burnham talk about Hope is like having Fred West talk about Love.

The situation of the UK has never been MORE hopeless, precisely because Andy Burnham can get to be Prime Minister, precisely because Andy Burnham is a fairly average representative of our representatives.

He’s a bog standard, factory line, utterly predictable and conformist embodiment of our political and media class. He replaced Starmer and is essentially the same Non Person, the same vacuity, the same howling void.

When he leaves the podium, when he departs, we are likely to get another one just the same.

Imagine a microphone on a stand. And behind the microphone on the stand there is a whirling, seething, roaring emptiness. It’s a gathering of hot air, whipping around, like a little tornado of dust and dead leaves and little sharp pebbles and stones that cut the skin. And it roars and roars and nothing it says makes sense. Everything it touches, it breaks. It goes off the podium, whirling pointlessly. And on comes another, exactly the same. The microphone crackles. Whooosh….whoosh….crsckle….whoosh….. wait, wait, there’s a word, there’s something there…..

HOPE. It’s a battered street sign smeared in shit and patterned with bullet holes, coming round again. It’s all the little tornado of dust and nothingness can offer. It means nothing.

The Policies

And so we come to the last and least, far less important to them than the whirling nothingness and the emotive shit.

Because nothing substantial is going to be dropped. Nothing good is going to be added. You don’t get sanity, folks. You get more of the same.

More invaders. More rapes. More lies. More oppression of the innocent, more coddling of the guilty. More censorship.

The only things they can add are extensions of the madness. Things can only get worse.

AI

Andy tells us that Britain is going to lead the AI Revolution. We are going to be at the cutting edge of the white hot tech revolution.

Older readers may be aware that our leftist leaders have been making such promises since 1963.

The curious thing about the Left is that they deliver the Stone Age or the Iron Age but always think they are delivering The Future. They are futurists, like the Soviets were. New Man. New Labour. New Britain. New Left.

Progressivism.

It’s all about the Future Utopia baby.

You know, the one delivered by aligning with Iron Age Theocracy and by importing people who think stoning women is ‘cutting edge’ morality.

Harold Wilson told us in 1963 that Britain would lead the white hot tech revolution. He was actually a KGB handled Soviet agent, and what he and the rest of Labour delivered was the death of our existing industrial base. The common understanding is that Thatcher killed it all off. The real understanding is that Wilson, Callaghan and Heath killed it off and Thatcher admitted it was dead.

Of course Britain won’t lead the AI Revolution, or anything, under Burnham. AI data centres require massive inward investment and a very robust energy grid and an equally robust water grid. Britain has none of these and Labour policies of Net Zero are destroying what we do have.

Nationalising the Water Companies

Which leads us to one of the other few firm policy points in the roaring, vapid mess that is a Burnham platform.

Andy wants to nationalise the water companies.

We are three trillion in debt.

Here how Ai assesses competing claims on the cost of doing what Andy proposes:

“The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) estimates the cost at approximately £100 billion, based on the sector’s Regulatory Capital Value (RCV) of £99.3 billion (2024) rising to £106.7 billion (2025). This figure assumes the government must compensate both shareholders and debt-holders. A report by Frontier Economics, commissioned by Thames Water creditors, projects a higher cost of £144 billion by 2030 using similar assumptions. These figures originate from a 2018 Social Market Foundation report that calculated a £90 billion takeover value, which has since been adjusted for inflation and investment growth.

Alternative Legal and Economic Views
Critics argue the true cost is close to zero or significantly lower. The think tank Common Wealth contends that under existing “special administration” rules, the government could take control without paying market value, as shareholders and bondholders have already accepted the risks of the companies’ financial instability. Legal scholar Ewan McGaughey notes that the market value of companies like Thames Water is far below their RCV, with private equity bids around £4 billion against a regulatory value of £20 billion. Additionally, some economists suggest that while there is no upfront cash cost to acquire the assets, the state would inherit the companies’ substantial debts, effectively transferring those liabilities to the public sector.”

Now these two broad responses can be characterised as honest (it’s going to cost a lot) and Marxist (it’s not going to cost anything because basically you can just seize it).

Neither though really cover what it will actually cost.

It’s not just buying out the private companies and the share holders (if you do that). It’s the knock on impacts. If you don’t buy them out and just seize the assets you would almost certainly cause huge market panic, mass dumping of British investments, and a gigantic economic crisis orders of magnitude greater than the Truss blip.

But if you are slightly more sensible than that and pay up, you add at least a £100 billion bill. You then take on State responsibility for all the employees and all their salaries and pensions and benefits of service, as well of course as all the running costs of the industry, all the repair costs, all the servicing and upgrading of the infrastructure.

The State is then paying 69,000 direct employees across 10 main water companies, and potentially up to 184,000 employees in the very closely connected water industry as a whole (supply chain, waste management etc). Several of the water companies have significant undunded existing pension liabilities and shortfalls (Thames Water: £152m; Severn Trent: £452.9m; Northumbrian: £181.5m; Anglian: £86m). Those costs are ABOVE whatever the annual pension costs are already running at.

Operating annual expenditure for the water companies is over £6 billion a year. The annual pension and salary commitments of the ten companies are running at around £3 billion a year.

What you are talking about is the State paying up to 9-10 billion a year it doesn’t need to, at fairly minimal estimates of the costs.

It doesn’t end there.

The water companies have committed to a number of upgrading, repair and improvement projects planned for the next five years:

• £12bn — upgrading ~2,900 storm overflows to cut sewage spills by 45%

• £12bn — new water supply capacity, including 9 new reservoirs and 9 large-scale water transfer schemes

• £24bn — environmental improvements (wastewater treatment works upgrades, nutrient reduction)

• £6bn — tackling nutrient pollution at ~1,000 sensitive sites

• £2bn (RAPID development funding) — unlocking an estimated £50bn of longer-term strategic water resource investment over coming decades

• Leakage reduction of a further 17% (to the lowest level since privatisation).

These add another £100-105 billion to the cost presuming the government goes ahead with them.

So over £200 BILLION added in government spending and debt, followed by 10 billion a year every year to come, with NO evidence it will reduce water bills, improve water supply, or benefit any ordinary citizen.

The Wider Picture

All this with:

• New legal migrant routes for yet more asylum seekers especially the most dangerous asylum seekers on the planet (Palestinians raised in a terrorist society). There are 500,000 Palestinians in camps who would qualify for these legal routes.

• Fresh fanaticism, escalation and commitment to the madness of Ukraine support and the expense and risks of that.

• No reduction of Net Zero spending and commitments and the continuing destruction of the energy grid.

• Doubling down on censorship.

• Moving to rejoin the EU with huge spending costs associated with that already committed.

No wonder they want you to concentrate on the synthetic emotion bullshit.