Technically, I did live through 1978 – I was three. Given that my earliest proper memory is a news report of the death of John Lennon in 1980, I am not, therefore, going to claim special knowledge of this period. Like most other journalists, I have read about the history and politics of the period, but I can’t remember it.

I do know that the truth is a bit more complicated than the images that remain.

Yes, there was a localised strike in Liverpool by gravediggers which meant that there was a short period during which burials were delayed. This did not mean that the whole of the UK ‘could not ever bury the dead’. The strike lasted for just two weeks and the backlog was then dealt with swiftly.

READ MORE: ‘Reciprocism: a new relationship between citizens and the state’

Yes, it’s absolutely true that a strike by bin collectors led to rubbish piling up in the streets – and most visibly in London’s Leicester Square. This lasted about eight weeks.

Both of these situations were clearly deeply unpleasant and turned voters against the unions, contributing to the victory of Thatcher in 1979. There are definitely lessons to be learned. But to learn them fully and properly, this history also needs to be understood as it was, not what it was turned into by the right-wing Thatcher-loving press.

Scare stories and folklore are often stronger than memories – which can be partial and subjective. However, I am not claiming that there should be (or even could be) a return to the kind of economics that is conjured up by those either nostalgic for, or horrified by, a return to 1970s-style politics.

But my real gripe is with the present and the absolute lack of political imagination created by the sense that there is a binary between 1970s union militancy and 1980s Thatcherite militancy.

The Thatcher revolution worked very well for a few. The short-term injection of capitalism that was the economic ‘Big Bang’, the selling off of national assets and council homes, did well for some areas, some people and some lives. But for the rest of us, and even for some of those immediate winners, it was a sugar rush that has had a very long crash.

The experiment should have come to an end in 2008 when the fragility of its model was exposed for all to see. Instead, its zombie corpse was reanimated by the austerity of Cameron and Osborne. And if you want to see the impact of the Coalition government’s unwillingness to intervene in the economy, look no further than today’s water and gas crises, which have both been supercharged by the private utilities failing to invest in storage infrastructure and the government’s failure to intervene to make them.

Ending the Thatcher settlement does not mean going backwards – it is essential to moving forwards.

Burnham’s desire to change an economy that does not work for far too many is not a regressive move – it is the only possible response to our broken economy and society.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Yes, we will need a better sense of what that will look like, how it will differ from going backwards and what our new future will look like. It won’t be simple and it won’t be easy.

But it wasn’t simple or easy for Thatcher and her acolytes to cause the damage in the first place. She didn’t take Britain back to the pre-war settlement. She took it to a new place – a darker, meaner, crueller one for most of us. She had a vision and an ambition and she saw it through.

Let us be clear – it is that level of ambition that we need from Andy Burnham now. But it is that level of ambition that he hints at that is scaring those few loud, well-platformed voices who benefit from the broken and unequal economy she created. That’s why they want to tell you that Burnham doesn’t represent a brighter future but a return to the past.

Burnham is absolutely correct in saying that Britain took a wrong turn in the 1980s. We see the damage all around us. But everyone in Labour has to be clear that we are not going back to the 1970s – we are going forward to build the kind of economy that works for everyone in the 2020s and beyond. That must be the level of ambition, that must be the direction of travel and that must be the promise that Burnham will offer in his forthcoming ten-year plan.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post Back to the future? appeared first on LabourList.

The principle is simple and sound: Decisions are often better made closer to the people they affect. 

Greater powers for elected mayors, combined authorities and local councils can sharpen accountability, spur innovation and produce policies shaped by local realities rather than national assumptions.

Yet there is nothing new about this insight.

In 2019 a newly installed Prime Minister launched “Levelling Up”. That agenda was about power but it was also about resources. The two are linked. They are not the same.

READ MORE:‘Five things the Labour Chancellor should do to deliver good growth in every postcode’

Britain’s regional inequalities did not arise because local leaders lacked authority. The North South divide cannot be explained by centralisation alone. Decades of uneven growth, investment and opportunity created the disparities we see today. 

Some regions enjoy stronger economies, higher productivity and greater wealth. Giving ‘weaker’ areas more control over transport, planning, housing and skills may help. By itself, it will not close the gap.

An elected mayor cannot spend money that does not exist.

Local autonomy matters. Resources matter more. Poorer regions need investment as well as influence, better infrastructure, stronger public services and sustained economic development. In short, levelling up requires redistribution.

That is the contradiction at the heart of the current devolution drive.

Devolution is sold as power moving away from the centre. Genuine levelling up demands a centre still capable of raising and redirecting wealth. The more serious a government is about reducing regional inequality, the more it must actively transfer resources to less prosperous parts of the country.

This raises awkward questions.

When one region receives extra investment, where does the money come from? Economic and social gaps cannot shrink unless some places contribute more than others. Regions may gain greater control over spending decisions, but many will still depend on Whitehall’s ability to move resources if living standards are ever to converge.

Taxation makes the argument sharper still.

Council Tax rests on property valuations more than thirty years old. Few MPs would call it a good system for funding local government. Yet reform remains politically toxic: any meaningful change will always create winners and losers.

The same applies to land value or property-based alternatives. They could produce a fairer settlement. They would also require wealthier areas to pay more.

My own region, the South East, shows why these questions are so sensitive. It contains some of Britain’s most prosperous communities and areas of real deprivation. Poor housing, low wages and social need sit alongside extraordinary wealth. Banbury alone has three wards in the most deprived 20 per cent nationally.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Treating the South East as a uniformly affluent bloc ignores this reality. Regional averages hide local hardship. Much of the area’s wealth is locked in property and other assets, leaving many residents asset-rich but cash-poor.

For Labour this creates a particular dilemma. The party has long argued for reducing economic disparities across the country. Yet the path to a parliamentary majority now runs through southern England. Success in the South depends on voters who may resist higher taxes or policies that appear to shift resources elsewhere. The economic case for redistribution and the electoral need for coalition building do not always align. Politicians cannot ignore the next election.

None of this means devolution is a mistake. There are strong arguments for giving local leaders greater control over the decisions that shape their communities.But power without resources achieves only so much. 

Devolution answers who makes the decisions. Redistribution decides whether those decision-makers have the means to act. Any serious programme of levelling up requires both: local autonomy and national solidarity. 

Reconciling those two principles remains the unresolved question at the heart of British politics. Until it is answered, the promise of a genuinely devolved and more balanced United Kingdom will stay just that; a promise.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post ‘Devolution without redistribution is just delegation’ appeared first on LabourList.

I worked in another clothes shop after that. It was a hot summer day and everyone on the shopfloor – customers and staff – was melting. We researched the rules around workplace temperatures and confronted the boss. They shut the shop early. When we came in the next day, fans were blowing cold air around the shopfloor and we were told we could take water breaks.

I inherited my interest in workers’ rights from my father, who was an active trade unionist. But it was this time, working jobs in hospitality and retail, that allowed me to follow in his footsteps, turn my interest into action and take those first steps into my future career.

In other words, my work as a young person shaped who I am – and where I am – today. Even though this generation is facing different challenges, I believe they fundamentally want the same things we wanted when we were young. To earn their own money, to make their own choices, and start building a future that excites them.

READ MORE: ‘We cannot go backwards on health and safety’

A good job ticks all of these boxes. Most importantly, it also gives young people the ability to find their passion, develop their skills and make connections that can open up new doors. Too many young people in Wales are being starved of that opportunity today.

The Challenge

The Milburn review of “Young People and Work”, commissioned by the UK Labour Government and published in May, made a big splash with its shocking headline figure that 1 in 8 people aged 16-24 were not in employment, education or training (NEET). Clearly, the issue of youth unemployment is bigger than any one policy, department orgovernment. And clearly now it demands a bigger and better response.

The challenge in Wales might be even bigger. According to our best estimates, from the end of last year, 1 in 6 young people in Wales are NEET. This should drive all of us to come together, think what we need to do differently – and then do it.

This issue is just as urgent as anything else we might discuss in politics. And yet, because we often refer to young people as “the future”, there is a temptation to see their issues as future issues. Lots of young people in Wales voted for a progressive government and that is what they expect. Growing up with Tory austerity, Covid and now a cost-of-living crisis, young people want to see a sense of urgency from their politicians and start feeling a tangible, positive difference in their lives.

Two months into this Plaid minority government, however, and young people in Wales are left with more questions than answers.

How is Plaid’s outsourced economic development agency going to create more opportunities in our communities?

When is Plaid going to properly fund additional learning needs in our schools?

Will this government back the Taith international exchange programme, introduced by Welsh Labour, beyond 2028?

And how is Plaid’s new employability support programme, set to replace Welsh Labour’s Young Person’s Guarantee, going to get more young people into good paid work?

The Future

If the Welsh Government wants to help more young people, it must tackle three big issues: job availability, quality and security.

Wales has a lower jobs density than England and Scotland, which means there are more working-age people competing for each job. According to the Office for National Statistics, there are more than three jobseekers for every one vacancy in Wales. That is more than twice the ratio in the South East of England. Artificial intelligence has already had an impact, and will continue to have an impact, on the number and nature of entry-level jobs.

These factors make it hard for young people in Wales to find work, especially if they are from disadvantaged backgrounds and don’t have connections who can give them a way in.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Job quality is another metric where Wales lags behind. According to research by the Health Foundation, workers in Wales are more likely to experience multiple negative aspects of job quality than workers in Scotland, Northern Ireland, or any region of England.

Young workers in sectors like retail and hospitality get trapped with low pay, limited training and insecure work. Bullying and discrimination are real concerns. The danger is that, when young people face poor pay, poor treatment, and poor conditions, they think it’s normal and expect to face these problems for the rest of their careers.

That can have a serious impact on their mental health, self-belief and determination to succeed.This is why programmes like the World of Work, introduced by the previous Welsh Labour Government and TUC Cymru, are so important, giving resources to schools and colleges so they can teach our future workforce about their rights at work, the role of trade unions and the power of collective bargaining.

That is the best way to tackle this issue: together. Trade unions, employers, schools, colleges, universities, local authorities, and governments in Westminster and Wales.

With the social partnership model already established in Wales, and enshrined in Welsh law, we are uniquely positioned to make this happen.The next employability support programme, which we are expecting next year, must have an urgent laser-focus on getting people into well-paid and secure work. That will mean listening to the people who know these issues best, collaborating across party lines and rallyingemployers and trade unions to make it happen.

I want to see a Wales where every young person can reach their full potential – here in Wales, regardless of their background, ambition or any obstacles they must overcome.

So if the Welsh Government wants to build a better future, it should start helping them to get good work.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post ‘If the Welsh government wants to be radical: help young people get good work’ appeared first on LabourList.

ASLEF, the Musicians’ Union, USDAW and the country’s largest trade union Unison have said they will not send delegations to the conference in September over a decision to block trans women from proceedings.

While trans women will be allowed at fringe events at the conference, they will not be permitted to participate in debates on the conference floor or vote to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling on the definition of ‘woman’.

However, four of the party’s 11 affiliated trade unions have expressed anger at the decision and have announced they will not attend the conference in protest.

A spokesperson for Unison, one of Labour’s largest union donors, said: “The union’s decided against sending a delegation to Labour women’s conference this year. This is because the party’s restrictions on access run counter to Unison’s policy on trans equality.”

A Unite spokesperson also confirmed to LabourList that the union will not be attending the party’s women’s conference this year and said: “This is because the party has excluded trans women, which runs counter to Usdaw’s policy on trans equality.”

The decision does not affect union attendance at Labour’s national conference, which also takes place in September in Liverpool.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

A spokesperson for Labour for Trans Rights said they remain “extremely disappointed” by the party’s decision to exclude trans women from the conference.

“For decades, trans women members have had a home in Labour’s structures, and it’s not acceptable that they’re being so blatantly excluded.

“The trade union movement – including the Labour-affiliated unions – have been incredible allies to the trans community. We hope that they’ll continue to use their influence in the Party to shift the new government towards a far more inclusive position.

“Labour has lost the trust of the LGBT+ community, and with a new government we have an enormous opportunity to rebuild our reputation as the party of equality.”

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

A spokesperson for Labour Women’s Declaration criticised the boycott and said: “The decision by some unions not to attend is a disappointing and petulant act of performative politics, demonstrating how out of touch some union leaders are with the women members they are elected to represent.

“The Labour Party is following the law as set out in the Equality Act 2010 in relation to positive actions for women, including women’s conference. In keeping with the Labour Party’s longstanding commitment to democratic and comradely debate, we look forward to engaging in respectful discussion of all policies and issues that matter to women.

“Minister Bridget Phillipson’s recently stated priorities for action – VAWG, equal pay and child poverty – accurately demonstrate the seriousness of the challenges facing women today. We hope union leaders will reconsider their decision and engage in the constructive dialogue that their members have every right to expect from their representatives.”

A Labour Party spokesperson said: “Labour is committed to advancing women in politics and to providing opportunities for all members to network, debate and contribute.

“Labour’s women’s conference reflects our commitment to addressing the underrepresentation of women in the party, inclusion for all, and compliance with the law.”

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post Four unions announce boycott of Labour women’s conference over trans exclusion appeared first on LabourList.

When the PLP decided to throw the overwhelming majority of its support behind the newly elected MP for Makerfield, how the public would take to the displacement of Keir Starmer as PM was not an obvious reaction to call.

But following a strong opening week, the momentum seems entirely with Burnham, and, as a result, Labour at present. Across LabourList today, you can read several articles that demonstrate the extent to which the ‘vibes’ have shifted inside our party.

In my interview with Bev Craig, I recognised exactly this as I met campaigners on a street corner in Salford to join them on their round of doorknocking. The positivity and optimism surrounding her election campaign was there for all to see.

READ MORE: Poll reveals voting intentions of Labour members for NEC election

Craig came across to me as an incredibly thoughtful politician with a clear sense of direction. Throughout the interview, she outlined a vision for the city region that is rooted in long-term planning rather than short-term headlines, only promising policies she knows she can deliver.

Of course, thanks to Andy and Bev, buses are very much a topic of conversation in Greater Manchester. With her policy to extend on the work Andy started, she hopes to extend his free bus travel for 16-18 year olds and allow 11-16 year olds the same opportunity. With this, Craig demonstrates both a continuity of the popular policy approach Burnham brought to the city region, while also outlining her own personal political philosophy behind these decisions.

Current polling indicators suggest Labour’s campaign in Greater Manchester has also benefitted from the ‘Burnham bounce’, providing a sense of optimism about how this election might go.

But, as Bev says: “it’s not a done deal” and we must never get complacent.

If you can find the time to support Bev as we enter the last 48 hours of campaigning, then please do. LabourList is with you all the way!

The “Burnham bounce” has not only become a feature of media commentary. According to analysis of LabourList’s latest polling – conducted by Survation – it also appears to be reflected in how Labour members view the government’s senior ministers.

Our resident data expert Daniel Green examines approval ratings across the cabinet following the reshuffle and finds evidence that positive sentiment extends well beyond the Prime Minister.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

One particularly notable finding is that the Prime Minister is now Labour members’ favourite member of the government team. That represents a marked contrast with the position seen during Keir Starmer’s premiership.

The wider trend is equally significant – as Daniel points out: “Of the 14 ministers who remained in Burnham’s Cabinet post-reshuffle, nine have seen a ‘Burnham bounce’ in approval among party members.”

Following a week of policy announcements and an excellently coordinated communications strategy, national polling has shown Labour moving ahead of Reform for the first time since 2025. While a single week of polling should never be treated as definitive, the result represents an important shift in the political narrative surrounding this government.

In short, it is evidence that the ‘Burnham bounce’ is as real outside of the party among the general public, as it is internally for Labour.

My advice to you is to enjoy this moment, without becoming complacent. It won’t always be like this, because politics can quickly get tough. But while it is, smile at the optimism you can feel as the polls – and vibes – finally seem to swing back in Labour’s direction.

Long may it continue. 

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post The ‘Burnham bounce’ appeared first on LabourList.

Polling conducted by Survation found that Labour members jointly ranked Barnard and Duale as their top choice for the party’s national executive committee, with around an eighth of the first preference vote each.

Two of Duale’s fellow Labour to Win candidates feature close behind, with Angela Davies and Peter Mason attracting 11 percent support among first preference votes.

According to the poll, Mainstream’s Jovan Owusu-Nepaul and Kerry Postlewhite will receive ten percent each in first preferences, while Cat Arnold would receive six percent – despite receiving the most CLP nominations.

When preferences are taken into consideration, all three candidates for the Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance and Mainstream, as well as three of Labour to Win’s four candidates, look set to be elected to the nine CLP seats on the NEC up for election.

More than half (59 percent) of members polled said they were certain to vote in the NEC election, compared to just four percent who told Survation they would not be casting a ballot.

Abdi Duale was the first black man to be elected to Labour’s NEC in 2022 and was re-elected in 2024. Duale previously served as a party organiser and has promised to improve the diversity of the party’s candidates, as well as strengthen Labour’s campaigning operation.

Like Duale, Jessica Barnard was also first elected to the NEC in 2022 and re-elected in 2024 – both times being elected in the first round of voting. Barnard had a suspension from the party lifted last month after a seven-month investigation ended with no further action. Barnard is among several NEC candidates to back a statement calling for “rebuilding basic democracy, pluralism and fair process within our party”.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Emma Burnell, editor of LabourList, said: “These results remind us what a broad party Labour is. It looks as though candidates from the three established slates – representing three very different traditions within the party – are in poll position. Much may change between now and the final result, but, as it stands, we may see an NEC CLP divsion that is not dominated by any one faction. How they – and the leadership – then approach that will tell us much about how the non-factional nature of the Party Burnham has advocated for will play out in practice.”

Survation, a member of the British Polling Council and a Market Research Society Partner, surveyed 812 readers of LabourList who also said they were Labour Party members between July 24 and 27.

Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age, sex, region, 2020 leadership vote and 2025 deputy leadership vote. Targets for weighting were drawn from the British Election Study and the results of the leadership and deputy leadership elections.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post Poll reveals voting intentions of Labour members for NEC election appeared first on LabourList.

The Labour Party knows that artificial intelligence is rapidly changing our economy and the nature of work. We are quite rightly focusing on leading these changes, making sure the UK plays its part, and holding companies that create challenges to account. We must continue to address these challenges and opportunities so that we are setting the UK up to lead this new AI era.

But first we must answer this simple question, who owns the wealth generated by AI from our data and how best do we use it not just today, but for future generations? The answer matters because AI is not creating value from nothing. It learns from data generated by all of us: through government departments, our tax system, our public services, our transport networks and our daily lives as we tap away at our screens. If every citizen contributes to this national resource, whether they realise it or not, then the British public should retain control over how it is used, who profits from it, and how the returns are shared.

READ MORE: ‘Andy Burnham needs a ‘sovereign and safe AI’ policy’

Yet unless we have a plan and build the infrastructure now to capture that wealth and invest it wisely, we risk losing control twice over: control of the data itself and of the wealth each of us helps create. The economic returns will flow into the hands of a concentrated few technology companies and their shareholders instead of the British public.

After discovering substantial oil resources beneath the North Sea, Norway secured it as a national asset. Successive governments established a sovereign wealth fund, investing revenues for future generations. Today it is worth more than £1.5 trillion and supports everything from pensions to public services.

Britain chose another path with its resources. North Sea revenues were absorbed into day-to-day spending. They helped fund tax cuts and current expenditure, but if Britain had followed Norway’s model, our own sovereign wealth fund could today be worth hundreds of billions of pounds.

Data is becoming the defining economic resource of the twenty-first century. Unlike fossil fuels, it does not diminish when used, it is a renewable resource. Its value only grows as datasets become richer, more connected and more useful. That’s why we must act now to secure the full benefits of this national asset for future generations.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Britain possesses something few countries can match. Our National Health Service provides cradle-to-grave healthcare records for almost the entire population. Alongside this sits decades of information held by HMRC, the Department for Work and Pensions, Companies House, the Land Registry, Ordnance Survey and many other public institutions. Taken together, these datasets represent one of Britain’s greatest strategic advantages, and they should remain under British control and deliver lasting benefits for the British people.

We must ensure that whenever public data creates commercial value, the public receives a permanent return. This means often licensing, not selling data. It means retaining control through royalty payments, revenue sharing and, where appropriate, equity stakes flowing into a sovereign data wealth fund owned and managed on behalf of the British people.

This Labour government has already taken important first steps to ensure that the benefits of this resource remain securely in our hands. The AI Opportunities Action Plan recognised government data as a strategic public asset and the National Data Library will improve access and coordination. But access alone is not enough.

There’s a missing institution. A National Data Wealth Fund would ensure that licensing revenues are invested rather than lost as day-to-day spending. Over time, those returns could support public services, scientific research, regional investment, skills, green industry and the economic transition that AI will inevitably bring to our workplaces and daily lives. Access to digital technology is now essential, and no one should be left behind in a digital poverty trap. The returns should be invested in improving digital skills and access to vital technology, particularly for those in our rural and coastal communities.

Labour has always believed that we should establish public assets together for collective reward. That principle must apply just as much in the age of artificial intelligence. Britain cannot become entirely dependent on foreign-owned systems trained on British public data that deliver private profits to individuals based elsewhere.

We cannot rewrite the decisions made over North Sea oil, but we can make a different choice this time and keep control of our national data resource and the wealth it creates. 

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post ‘Britain must control the value created from our own data – or someone else will’ appeared first on LabourList.

Current leader of Manchester City Council Bev Craig is looking to take on the role of Greater Manchester Mayor since it was vacated by our now Prime Minister following his storming victory in Makerfield last month. On Thursday, she will face the electorate. I had the pleasure of being able to join the Mayoral candidate and her fantastic team on the doorsteps this week as they head into their last few days of campaigning.

I met Bev and her team on a street corner in Salford. There was a strong turnout of members there to support her, and I got the sense from speaking to them before the session began that this had been common throughout the whole campaign. There was much talk about whether Craig would arrive on her famous battle bus. 

READ MORE: Delivering in local government: How Labour is building a better Greater Manchester

It was no surprise, as buses have become a key component of Craig’s mayoral campaign. 

Growing up in Greater Manchester, I felt the positive effects first-hand of having Andy Burnham as our Mayor – most notably through his initiative to make bus travel free for all 16-18 year olds within the region. 

Craig has stated that she plans to extend this initiative to 11 – 16 year olds as well. Being one of her first campaign promises, this policy announcement has seen her develop a strong campaign identity, with her even being recognised by lots of local youths. 

Lads in tracksuits

“If you’d asked me, would I have thought in this campaign that I would have had newfound attention from the 14 to 17 year old lads in tracksuits across Greater Manchester then I would have just laughed!” she told me. 

“But actually, there’s been a real spark in young people, where they’re the ones that have been stopping me and being, ‘are you the bus lady?’ Or the parents have been like, ‘are you the one that’s talking about giving the kids a bus pass?’ And like, I don’t think you see that often where kids are switching on because for generations young people haven’t voted, so they’ve never quite been at the forefront of people’s minds.”

This policy is designed with a much greater intended benefit than solely delivering electoral success, however. 

“This for me was driven by a desire two-fold, the first is help to families”. Craig acknowledged a continued difficulty for families across Greater Manchester to face the cost of living crisis. While accepting that there are a limited number of “levers” for Mayors to help directly with the cost of living crisis, she estimates families could save an extra £500 a year through this measure. 

The second, she told me, was that it will help young people access more opportunities and to encourage aspiration. “The message that it gives young people…is that you can go wherever you want to go”. 

Craig has been a councillor since 2011 and leader of Manchester City Council since 2021. As a result, she has also been a member of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, serving as Vice-Chair and holding the portfolio of Economy, Business and inclusive growth. How did she then see GMCA being able to pay for an extension of free bus travel?

“This will cost greater Manchester somewhere between a max of £11 to £13 million a year. It’s revenue-foregone, which means that those bus seats already exist. There’s just nobody sat on them. So actually, when it comes to expense, it’s actually quite a low cost intervention for something that’s massive.”

This is not the only policy I wanted to hear more from Craig about. She has also discussed the introduction of a ‘GM Culture Card’. When representing a city region with as vibrant cultural contributions as Greater Manchester, I asked to hear more about what the idea behind this would be. 

“As we start to become an even bigger beacon for tourism and international travel, I want to make sure that local residents aren’t priced out. 

“So be that free days, free activities, things that you can find in an app, or be that discount getting into something. It’s a really practical way of saying that you’re growing as a city region… but you’re also benefiting local residents, and it doesn’t have to cost the public purse loads of money.” 

As she mentioned the growth of Greater Manchester, I referenced the geography of the city region. 

Prosperity doesn’t automatically flow

As Greater Manchester continues to be an outlier in its relative economic success amid hard times across the nation, it is clear when visiting that much of the opportunity is harnessed within the city centre of Manchester itself. 

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

That is not to say there have not been other areas that have seen redevelopment over recent years. Town centres like Bury and Stockport demonstrate clear visible signs of revitalisation, for example. 

But how did Labour’s Mayoral candidate for the whole region hope to see prosperity delivered across the entirety of the place she seeks to represent at the top level?

“I think there is a political narrative in that, of course. Yep. And you know, if you’re looking at prosperity purely in terms of GVA or GDP, then yeah, it sits in the city centre. 

“But Manchester as a borough is the most deprived borough in all of Greater Manchester, and one of the most deprived in the country. So even within the borough of Manchester, wealth and prosperity doesn’t automatically flow.

“The next wave of the challenge is for people who have historically not been able to access those kinds of opportunities [to work within the city centre], and I think that’s both in terms of the jobs that people get, but also the visible intervention that we make in town centres and on high streets, because people don’t feel success if they don’t see it.”

High Streets Fund

Tackling the issue of the dying High Street is something we hear from politicians consistently. If this is essential to restoring hope and optimism to all the areas that make up a large city region like Manchester, then how would Craig plan to ensure investment finds its way to these areas?

Her answer is a High Street fund backed by investment. “It comes from how you take the business rates from the city centre, media city, and places that are doing well, and fund that into town centers.

“Crucially, rather than just giving it to councils, you’re giving it to community groups, traders’ groups to be able to make a pitch. But I’m also asking the government for more power because at the minute, councils can compulsory purchase derelict buildings. It takes a long time and it’s very expensive. I want us to be able to force a sale.”

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

If elected Mayor, Craig would wish to see unused buildings that are accruing value but not having anything done with them, forced into sale to support community initiatives that will. She points towards our economic structure having changed over the last 30 years “in a way that people feel that they’ve got less agency and control.”

“My high streets fund is also backed by a community investment fund that looks at ownership models.” 

Craig is standing as a Labour and Co-Operative candidate. It was clear that the values of the Co-Op movement were prevalent in the thinking behind approaching the high street in this way. In a word, the philosophy behind her entire campaign appears to revolve around empowerment. Whether that is empowering communities to own the businesses on their high streets, or young people to have greater access to opportunities across the area, Labour’s candidate to be the next Mayor of Greater Manchester is completely committed to delivering for the entire city region she seeks to represent.

“Well, the reality is, for me, I don’t want a single kid in this country to have the life that I had growing up, I want them to have something better.

“So I actually think coming from that kind of background, where you know the economy didn’t work for you, the state didn’t work for you… lets you have the confidence to be able to say, well, you know what? Not every institution knows best. Maybe we could genuinely just let people have a bit of a go, backed with people in power, and it’s why I’ve also focused on only promising things that I can deliver, because I actually think it’s more dangerous to promise something you can’t deliver than to not promise anything at all.” 

Not a done deal

Equipped also with a strong presence across social media platforms and a clear ability as a good communicator, it was not a shock to find that polling indicates Craig has a strong chance of success this week.

Much of the data suggests that even if determining an outright winner through first preference votes may be quite tight, Craig is expected to do well on second preference votes across the boroughs. 

However, when asked what her message to LabourList readers would be, she made clear to say that this by-election is “not a done deal,” asking for continued support in the final few days of campaigning to ensure Greater Manchester returns a Labour and Co-Operative Mayor for continued success across the City region.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post ‘It’s not a done deal’: Interview with Bev Craig appeared first on LabourList.

They offer glimpses of what the Prime Minister has promised, life essentials back within reach and the biggest transfer of power out of Whitehall in modern times. But relief at the margins is what every recent government has reached for. The real test is the ten-year plan promised for later this year, and whether it is genuinely bold structural reform, and grounded in a long-term vision for the sort of Britain we collectively wish to build.

Burnham is the seventh prime minister since 2016, and every predecessor inherited the same problem. A state that costs more each year while delivering less, and a 10-million-word tax code so encrusted with reliefs and cliff edges that nobody will be brave enough to rip it up and start again. If there is one lesson he can learn from his predecessors, it’s that incremental change is a tried and tested method for a short stint at the top. If this government is to be different, its plan must treat tax, devolution, bills and welfare as one reform, not four departmental workstreams.

READ MORE: ‘Reciprocism: a new relationship between citizens and the state’

An overhaul of the tax code is long overdue. Britain taxes income six different ways, marginal rates lurch as high as 62% while wages carry the load. The answer is not another relief or another levy, but to simplify and widen the base. One option we have researched at the Global Institute for Prosperity is to fold income tax, National Insurance and taxes on capital into a single progressive levy that cuts the bill for nearly three quarters of full-time workers relying only on their wages. A new nurse, teacher or police constable would keep several hundred pounds more a year. That is what a progressive tax cut for working people could look like.

Simplification would also enable the sort of devolution Burnham has built his politics on. He knows the difference between devolved delivery and devolved power, English local government spends money Whitehall controls, and its one real tax, Council Tax, is still based on 1991 valuations and falls hardest on the most modest homes; for example,  a mansion in Mayfair pays less than a three bedroom house in Hull.

Replacing both Council Tax and Stamp Duty with a simple annual tax of 1% of a property’s value, paid straight to local government, would give mayors and councils money of their own to raise and spend, in every part of the country and solve the gridlock that exists in our housing market.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Household bills need the same structural treatment. Taking VAT off electricity saves a typical household around £45 over six months, but the standing charges, policy levies and network debt costs that keep bills high will still be there in April, when the cut expires. If essentials are to come back under public control, the plan must change how energy, water and transport are charged for, not just who pays the tax on top.

Welfare belongs in the same conversation. A system that pays nearly a million young people to remain outside education, employment and training, then sanctions them for it, serves nobody. Burnham must find a way to get this generation working in meaningful jobs.

The objection to major structural reform has always been affordability and already we have seen a wave of cries of how will Burnham pay for this. To those doubters I point to what Beveridge achieved in 1942. There are ways to make this work, our plan, Prosperity 2030, for example, is fully costed across 30 policies, requires no new borrowing, and leaves £38 billion a year of headroom for the government’s own priorities.

Burnham is right that households need breathing space in the immediate term. But breathing space is what you offer while you decide on the treatment. This autumn, we will hopefully find out whether he intends to treat the condition and has a radical plan that is bold enough to overcome Britain’s long-term structural challenges.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post ”Breathing space is welcome, but Burnham’s ten-year plan must be when Britain changes’ appeared first on LabourList.

The poll, conducted by Survation, found that 82 percent of members thought Starmer made the right decision in standing down as party leader and Prime Minister, with only 13 percent believing he should not have done so.

Starmer’s resignation came after more than 100 Labour MPs called on him to set out a timetable for his departure from Downing Street following dismal local and devolved election results and criticism of his handling of the Mandelson scandal.

Reflecting on his time in office, Labour members are more split – with just over half (53 percent) believing he governed well during his stint in Number 10, with 47 percent believing he fared badly as Prime Minister.

When asked what Keir Starmer’s greatest achievement was as party leader and Prime Minister, one in five members (22 percent) said the Employment Rights Act was the pinnacle of his success, while 17 percent said reforming the Labour Party into an electable force again was his peak accomplishment.

Starmer’s approval among the party membership has risen since his resignation, jumping from -2 in April to +16 in our latest poll.

However, there remains a split in regional support for the former Prime Minister, with a difference in view along how members voted in the deputy leadership contest.

Members in the East of England had the highest approval for Starmer at +31, compared to members in the North East who had the lowest at -6.

Approval for Starmer was very high among members who backed Bridget Phillipson for deputy leader, at +71 – a stark contrast to those who backed Lucy Powell at -3.

Become a friend of LabourList and join our community. Our friends support our vital non-factional work and get access to exclusive content and events. 

Emma Burnell, editor of LabourList, said: “Labour members have a balanced view of Starmer and his time in office and as leader of the Labour Party. There is a real sense of gratitude that sits alongside a broad recognition that his stepping down was the right thing for the Party and the country.

“In fact, in this bounce in approval ratings we may well be seeing that combination of gratitude for both his leadership and the dignified nature of his departure.”

Damian Lyons Lowe, chief executive of Survation, which conducted the poll, said: “Labour
members have reached a clear verdict on Keir Starmer’s departure and a much softer one on
his record than they held while he was in office. 82 percent say he was right to step down. But asked how well he governed, 53 percent now say well and 47 percent badly — and the same question returned 42/57 in February and 41/59 in April. His record improved by more than 20 points at the moment he stopped being Prime Minister.

“His own favourability has moved the same way, from −2 in April to +16. The recovery is
uneven, though. Among Phillipson’s deputy leadership backers he is on +71, which is not a new
high so much as a return to the +66 they gave him in February before dipping to +40 in the spring. Among Powell’s backers, he has gone from −26 to −3: they have stopped being hostile,
rather than warmed to him.

“What that describes is most likely gratitude for the manner of the exit rather than a reappraisal
of the substance.”

Survation, a member of the British Polling Council and a Market Research Society Partner, surveyed 812 readers of LabourList who also said they were Labour Party members between July 24 and 27.

Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age, sex, region, 2020 leadership vote and 2025 deputy leadership vote. Targets for weighting were drawn from the British Election Study and the results of the leadership and deputy leadership elections.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook. You can also write to our editor to share your thoughts on our stories and share your own. The best letters are published every Sunday.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at mail@labourlist.org.
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email mail@labourlist.org.
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at customer.service@totalpolitics.com.

The post Labour members divided over performance of Starmer as Prime Minister appeared first on LabourList.