Does Andy Burnham Stand a Chance of Success?

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer resigned yesterday. Various forms of dissatisfaction with him lay behind the decision, but the fundamental problem was likely the collapse in support for the Labour Party. Nor does it help that, at the same time, Reform UK, which has drawn much of its support from concerns over immigration, has become the country's most popular political movement.

Western media outlets (including the BBC, CNN, MTV3 and Yleisradio) have cited a number of reasons for Starmer's resignation, including the rising cost of living for pensioners, plans to cut benefits paid to disabled people, his acceptance of gifts and freebies, Labour's poor performance in recent local elections, the emergence of a credible rival from within his own party, the country's growing debt burden, sluggish economic growth, his intention to appoint Peter Mandelson despite the latter's association with the Epstein scandal, broader structural issues related to healthcare and housing reform, and his lack of charisma as a politician.

It therefore remains to be seen how British politics will develop under a new prime minister. Will the next prime minister – most likely Labour's Andy Burnham – succeed in reviving his party's popularity, or will he go down in history as the last prime minister of an old establishment party?

* * *

According to Wikipedia, Burnham described himself as a socialist in 2010 and emphasised a philosophy he called aspirational socialism, characterised by redistribution, collectivism and internationalism.

Burnham strongly opposes nationalism, which he has described as "an ugly form of politics". As Mayor of Greater Manchester, however, Burnham has pledged to be "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime".

Politically, Burnham currently places himself – again according to Wikipedia – on the moderate left of the Labour Party. This view is also reflected in several media outlets, including the Financial Times, New Statesman and LabourList.

For my part, I believe that the key to Burnham's success lies in resolving the problems related to immigration and immigrants in the island nation. If he fails to do so, his career at the pinnacle of British politics is also likely to be rather short-lived.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is the EU a Real Player in World Politics—or Just a Paper Tiger?
Just Another Case of Multiculturality in Manchester, UK
When Diversity Beats Doctors: Three UK Healthcare Realities to Make Stalin Envious

Jesuit Morality in Crime Reporting on Immigrants

Attitudes toward the problems of humanitarian immigration in the UK took a strange turn after Keir Starmer came to power. He began arresting people participating in protests and those complaining about abuses, and even started releasing criminals from prisons to make room for these political prisoners.

Since then, Starmer has changed direction and ordered investigations into the most serious crimes. From here in Finland, I can't say how seriously those investigations have been pursued.

* * *

In Finland, too, efforts were made to conceal the problems of immigration for a long time, but gradually this became difficult as the general sense of security—or lack thereof—became increasingly widespread. At some point, Finnish media decided that the names of criminals would be published if their sentences were at least two years long.

However, the fact remains that hardly anyone is interested in the names of those convicted. Rather, what is important—especially in terms of people's views on immigration policy—is that the ethnic background of those who commit crimes should be reported in all, or at least in more than minor, offenses.

* * *

Today’s crime news concerned a man about ten years older who had provided intoxicants and sexually exploited a girl who was originally 12 years old over a two-year period. Nothing is said about the man's ethnic background; instead, it’s stated that “the name of the convicted is withheld to protect the victim.”

This practice has become more common in most media in recent years. As a result, essential information about the perpetrators of sexual crimes—particularly those against teenagers—is increasingly being withheld. This is the case even though people aren’t interested in the offender’s name, as I stated earlier, but in whether the person belongs to the native or immigrant population.

This sharply contradicts the guidelines used by the Finnish press, which remind journalists that—quote—“journalism that strives for truth helps the public form a picture of society and the world.” Instead, it seems to follow the centuries-old Jesuit morality, in which "the end justifies the means."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Commission Should Take Migration and Related Crime Seriously
The Increasing Criminality Among Swedish Students Stems from Their Values
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?

Why Is Keir Starmer Commissioning an Inquiry Instead of Taking Action?

From the perspective here in Finland, it seems strange that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Keir Starmer, has decided to commission an investigation into grooming gangs. This is because the existence of these gangs and their ethnic composition have been known in Finland for a long time already.

For example, I first wrote (in Finnish) about the subject back in 2017, that is, about eight years ago. At the time, I specifically stated that "the worst known case is probably the Rotherham rape ring, which operated in the UK for 16 years and was covered up by the authorities for years out of fear of being labeled racist."

Since then, I have continued to write about the topic. The following year, in 2018, I brought up a prostitution ring that had operated in Telford, England, for decades, "which may have had up to a thousand child victims, mostly from the native population."

In other words, the Asian grooming gangs in the UK—and the related issues with authorities—have been quite well known to us Finns for a long time. And we are also aware that Keir Starmer's administration tried to sweep the matter under the rug by blaming those who aimed to draw official attention to child rapists.

An example of this is my own English-language article, in which I stated: "this is why it is necessary to ask the people of Britain and the world—especially those who see far-right extremism and racism everywhere—why they consider violent protests acceptable in the case of George Floyd, but not in response to the child murders that have shocked the United Kingdom?"

So, if there is no ambiguity here in Finland about the existence or composition of the UK’s grooming gangs, then why on earth is Keir Starmer only now—in the summer of 2025—starting to take action... excuse me, ordering an investigation into the matter? Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to ensure that there is no room for such gangs in British society in the future?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Reform UK’s Landslide: Wake-Up Call for Labour and Tories Alike
Why Is the Case of Issam Rafil, Convicted of a Sexual Offense in Finland, Important for Britain?
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?

Reform UK’s Landslide: Wake-Up Call for Labour and Tories Alike

There was a revolution in Britain's local elections. I mean that Reform UK achieved a landslide victory, and the ruling Labour Party was reduced to a minor party.

The reason is not hard to guess. It is, naturally, Britain's difficulties with its immigrant-background population. And not just that, but also the inability of the police and the judicial system to maintain control of society.

However, it must be remembered that local elections do not decide national matters, let alone choose the prime minister and government. And the results we’ve just seen may have no effect at all on Keir Starmer’s government policy.

On the other hand, it would be wise for Starmer to take the result seriously and begin correcting the mistakes he has made. And in doing so—perhaps—save his and his party’s position as one of Britain's leading political forces.

Then again, the Conservatives also have reason to reflect, as their position as Britain’s second major party has now been called into question. And that’s why it will be interesting to see how the outcome of the local elections will affect their opposition strategy.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
UK Supreme Court Distinguishes Between the Rights of Women and Trans Women
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?

Keir Starmer’s Message to Ireland, Spain, and Portugal: This Is About All of Europe

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Keir Starmer, warned Europeans that Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, aims to disarm Ukraine in peace negotiations. If that were to happen, it would be significantly easier for Russia to launch a new attack on Ukraine and bring it under its control.

For this reason, he wants both Britain and the rest of Europe to act swiftly to ensure there is a counterforce against Russia, should a Trump-led USA concede to Putin’s demands. On this matter, Starmer is not only right but also highlighting an essential condition for all of Europe and its citizens to breathe freely once again.

Therefore, Europeans—including the Irish, Spanish, and Portuguese—must understand that this is not just an issue for Russia’s border states but a matter of the future of free Europe as a whole. That is why even the westernmost nations of the continent must participate in assembling military power against Russia, just as others do—because only in this way can Putin’s imperialist dreams be crushed.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Anyone Who Hired Steve Witkoff Should Be Fired for Incompetence
Ukraine's Struggle Is Also Our Struggle
Putin's Threat Bolsters European Border States' Defense Against Russia

Europe Needs Leadership and Urgent Defense Actions

The President of Finland, Alexander Stubb, told that he supports British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s initiatives for a new ceasefire plan in Ukraine. According to the president, Europe currently needs leadership, which Starmer is demonstrating.

Stubb also stated that the winner of Friday’s meeting between Trump, Vance, and Zelensky was Vladimir Putin. However, despite this, the relationship between the United States and Europe remains strong.

For this reason, he urged people to stay calm in a very Finnish way—by advising them to take deep breaths, have a cold plunge, go to the sauna, and think things through. He also promised to return to the matter later.

Beyond that, Stubb did not wish to give instructions to Volodymyr Zelensky either. Instead, Finland’s Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (NCP) stated that all European countries must strengthen their defense capabilities to the maximum extent, with the goal of being able to defend themselves independently within ten years.

He also noted that Europe is unlikely to reach consensus on this matter, so responsible nations must be ready to make joint decisions—even without those who are unwilling to participate.

It remains to be seen whether Europe will succeed in finding its footing in this changing situation, where military security must also be considered alongside the challenges posed by weak economic growth and internal security. A positive signal in this regard, however, is that the European Commission has just decided to reduce internal EU bureaucracy and regulations to enable economic growth.

To me, it is clear that none of the above issues will be hindered by Finland’s current leadership. That is why it would be beneficial for progress to be made quickly, as democracy may once again bring forth political movements or other leaders whose understanding does not always suffice to recognize facts—let alone act accordingly.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Political Rhetoric Like Trump-Zelenskyi’s Has Deep Historical Roots
President of Finland Asked Whether There Are Top Politicians With Serious Intellectual Limitations
Finland and the USA: Strong Allies with Shared Interests or a Trade Dispute?

Why Is the Case of Issam Rafil, Convicted of a Sexual Offense in Finland, Important for Britain?

I begin this text with a court decision that I hope will gain attention in Britain, particularly at 10 Downing Street. The quote is from Finland's largest daily newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat, and reads as follows: "Helsinki District Court sentenced Issam Rafil, born in 1984, to three years and four months in prison for two rapes."

I mention this because, although such crimes—occurring with increasing frequency—are often left unspoken in Finland, they occasionally make their way into the country's leading media outlets. This was also the case with the aforementioned rapist. In this matter, the real winner is, above all, freedom of speech, which the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has recently sought to curtail (see also this text).

More generally, Finland finds itself in a difficult position as sexual crimes are rising rapidly. According to the country's statistics agency, approximately 6,700 sexual offenses were reported between January and September 2024. Of these, around 1,400 were classified as rapes under the new sexual offense law, marking a 40% increase compared to the previous year.

According to a police inspector, the high numbers can partly be explained by the fact that sexual crimes occurring online easily create spikes in police statistics. On the internet, the number of victims can quickly rise to hundreds.

I believe this explanation is accurate. Nevertheless, I also think that certain cultural factors play a role in this issue. For this reason, I find it highly necessary that Petteri Orpo's government program for 2024–2027 includes as many as 32 measures. These include learning the Finnish language, gaining employment, familiarizing oneself with Finnish society, and learning to adhere to its rules. In relation to the theme I am addressing here, the last of these is the most important.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Citizen Journalism, Free Speech, and EU Challenges
Finnish Immigration Policy Aims to Maximize Benefits and Minimize Drawbacks
The UK Prime Minister Took a One-Sided Stance on the Country's Protests

Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?

In the UK, a petition was launched to call for a General Election. Its proposer believes that "the current Labour Government has gone back on the promises it laid out in the lead-up to the last election." The Government needs to respond to the request because it has obtained more than 2.6 million signatories in just a few days.

This is a peculiar case, as the election that transferred power from the Conservatives to the Labour Party took place only last July 4th — just four and a half months ago.

This demonstrates that Keir Starmer is facing exceptional dissatisfaction in the UK. One likely reason is the heavy-handed manner in which his government dealt with Britons protesting against criminal immigrants in late summer. It even released actual criminals from prison to make room for political detainees.

There is also data to back this up. According to surveys, a majority of the public was already dissatisfied with Starmer’s administration by September. In a recent poll, 28% of the public hold a favourable view of Labour, compared to 49% who view the party unfavourably.

However, other parties are not faring well either. Reform UK has the highest favourability rating of any party, with 27% holding a favourable view of the party and 46% unfavourable, while the figures for other parties are even worse.

It is therefore necessary to ask whether the UK's democracy is facing an existential crisis where no political solution satisfies the citizens. And one must hope — if this is indeed the case — that the politicians of the island nation find a way to address the situation while respecting the principles of democracy.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Predictions Based on the Opinion Polls in the UK
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?
Elections in the UK: A Shift Toward Hand-Waving Politics?

Predictions Based on the Opinion Polls in the UK

The elections in the United Kingdom gave the Labour Party virtually unlimited power with around one-third of the vote. This was due to the electoral system, but at the same time, it was obviously contrary to the general idea of democracy, where every political movement should have representation in the decision-making bodies—parliaments—that reflects their share of the vote as accurately as possible.

Thus, Keir Starmer became Prime Minister, and his government has "distinguished itself" by violently suppressing protests and restricting freedom of speech. You might expect this to be reflected in post-election party support polls.

Interestingly, according to Politico's published tracking, Labour's support has remained unchanged, as has the Conservatives'. However, the support for Nigel Farage's Reform UK and the Greens has increased by several percentage points, even though the latter, in particular, has no realistic chance of becoming a significant political player due to the peculiarities of the UK's electoral system.

Let’s consider what would happen if this trend continued until the next elections. In that case, Reform UK would surpass the Conservatives in support and perhaps even challenge Labour. However, this party differs from the other two in that its support is distributed much more evenly across the population and geography. Therefore, far fewer of its candidates would be elected in the UK’s single-member constituencies than would happen under a proportional electoral system.

Thus, Labour might continue to hold power in Britain even if its vote count ended up being smaller than that of Reform UK. Only a true landslide victory could make Farage the Prime Minister.

For this reason, it is not insignificant how the British people react to Starmer’s government policies. Will censorship of opinions and turning a blind eye to the behavior of immigrants cause Labour supporters to abandon Starmer, or will they see these—odd from a Finnish perspective—actions as reflecting their will as expressed in the elections?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Swedish TV Did Not Learn Anything From the Riots in the UK
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?
Elections in the UK: A Shift Toward Hand-Waving Politics?

Javier Milei of Argentina Called England a Dystopian Socialist Nightmare

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Keir Starmer, faced a crisis after several white girls were stabbed, followed by demonstrations against British immigration policies that included some violent individuals. Then, he—or his cabinet—made a major mistake by adopting a two-tiered approach, favoring Muslims and targeting British rioters.

As a solution, the courts started to impose strict punishments on people for their social media posts. According to the Argentinian President, Javier Milei, this indicated that England was transforming into a dystopian socialist nightmare.

Milei: "we are undertaking a change of paradigm, not only economic, but also social, political and cultural. And with this change we are going against the direction that in recent times many countries in the world are undertaking. While other countries propose censorship, we propose freedom of expression.

Look at just what is happening in England, since the socialists came to power, they are putting people in jail for posting on social networks.  Well, the journalists here would also like it because, let's say, they don't like that they have lost the mic, the monopoly of the microphone and to be able to use that tool to distort and dirty, slander at no cost.

The social networks send them invoices and they don't like it. Stop looking for ghosts. They are receiving the same thing they did, but nothing more than people do it organically because they realized that many of them are criminals. In turn, while others are getting closer and closer to falling into cultural and religious wars, which will eventually expel people from their countries of origin, we invite the rest of the free world to participate in a country under reconstruction."

Well said and truthful, but it's unlikely to ever be reported in the Finnish mainstream media. And perhaps not in the English media either?  

I would not have believed this could happen in Western Europe. And I am happy that in Finland, there is no fear of the authorities because of social media posts. That's why I dare to bring this matter to your attention, my esteemed international and Finnish readers.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Freedom of Speech in Danger
Swedish TV Did Not Learn Anything From the Riots in the UK
Elections in the UK: A Shift Toward Hand-Waving Politics?

The UK Prime Minister Took a One-Sided Stance on the Country's Protests

A knife attack by an immigrant-background individual at a children's dance event has led to escalating protests in the UK. You can get a fairly comprehensive picture of these protests from this social media thread.

According to the thread, violence has been committed by anti-immigration protesters—some of whom are far-right extremists—as well as Muslim immigrants. Additionally, it appears that "woke" leftists have also been involved in the violence.

However, this does not change the fact that the majority of protesters have not engaged in any violence but have simply wanted to express their dissatisfaction with the immigration policies being practiced in their country. These people are most likely ordinary Britons.

* * *

A separate issue involves the attacks on two hotels housing asylum seekers. In Tamworth, a town with a population of about 80,000, there have been incidents of rape, some of which were committed by individuals with immigrant backgrounds, though not all.

Rotherham is a slightly larger town, known for a child abuse ring that operated for about 30 years, during which Pakistani men sexually abused around 1,400 girls and women.

Authorities have been aware of this situation since at least 1990, but the operation was not shut down until 23 years later. This delay was due to a combination of factors, including race, class, religion, and gender.

There was fear that the ethnicity of the perpetrators would lead to accusations of racism, as well as contemptuous and sexist attitudes toward the primarily working-class victims. Additionally, authorities were concerned with protecting the town’s reputation, their training was inadequate, and they struggled to find the resources to investigate the matter.

Therefore, it is extremely interesting that Rotherham has now come to the forefront of these events, with an attack on a hotel doing business with migrants from developing countries. And I can fully understand the reasons why the town does not welcome immigrants who come solely for the high social welfare in the UK.

* * *

The UK's newly appointed Labour Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has naturally commented on the events. According to him, people in UK have the right to feel safe, and yet we have seen Muslim communities being targeted, mosques attacked, other minority communities persecuted, Nazi salutes made on the streets, police officers attacked, and baseless violence used alongside racist rhetoric. So, he has no hesitation in calling that as far-right hooliganism.

However, referring back to the social media thread I linked at the beginning, it would have generally been better if the Prime Minister had not taken sides at this point, but rather condemned all forms of violence. This is true even though the violence was undoubtedly initiated by anti-immigration young men, whom Starmer likely meant by the term "far-right."

A more neutral stance has indeed been taken by some. For example, Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner Donna Jones, who is also a Conservative politician, condemned the rioters but also criticized the Prime Minister’s actions.

According to Jones, Starmer’s actions have led to accusations of two-tier policing, which has incited protesters who claim to be fighting for Britain’s sovereignty, identity, and to stop illegal immigration. She also mentioned having spoken to people on both sides and called on the government to recognize the underlying causes of the unrest so that it can be stopped.

It remains to be seen what political solutions the UK will ultimately adopt and whether these will lead to changes in the country’s immigration policies or even serve as the building blocks for future—and possibly even more severe—social crises driven by changes in the demographic structure.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?
Elections in the UK: A Shift Toward Hand-Waving Politics?
A white family does not represent real Londoners