“I’m more of a spender than a saver. I would much prefer to say ‘yes’,” confessed Andy Burnham in 2024. This attitude suited him well as mayor of Greater Manchester; it was his job to wring as much cash from Westminster as possible. But after Sir Keir Starmer resigned on June 22nd, the newly elected MP for Makerfield is now almost certain to become the next prime minister. He would be Britain’s seventh since 2016. Being in charge of doling out the dosh (and responsible for the nuclear codes to boot) is a much tougher gig than Mr Burnham is used to. For a start, he will have to begin saying “no”.
FILE – Andy Burnham smiles during a campaign visit to Ashton-in-Makerfield before the forthcoming by-election, in Manchester, England, Tuesday, June 9, 2026. (AP Photo/Jon Super)
Mr Burnham has undeniable strengths. He is untainted with the government’s failures and can talk human. His net favourability rating (-4 percentage points) might seem bad, but it is better than that of any British party leader (Sir Keir’s is -45). Labour MPs look set to back him in force, convinced his heart is in the right place, something the bloodless Sir Keir never quite managed. Wes Streeting, a more centrist rival, has rowed in behind him. When nominations close on July 15th Mr Burnham is likely to be uncontested.
That gives Mr Burnham precious little time to prepare for his huge new job. He rails against the sins of politicians past. Deregulation, privatisation and deindustrialisation are just some of the abstract nouns in his sights. But the would-be prime minister is gnomic about what he would do in office. He talks vaguely of “stronger public control” of essential services, without clarifying what he means. He flip-flops on key policies, recently recommitting to Sir Keir’s fiscal rules having previously called for these to be relaxed to fund defence. And he is silent on some of the most pressing issues, like how to navigate the upheaval from AI.
Tackling the country’s deeply entrenched problems will require a relentless focus on the future, not the 1980s. A main reason that Britons seethe at governments of all stripes is that their living standards have stagnated. Mean wages have grown by just 1% in real terms since Labour took office in 2024, and by a paltry 4.5% since April 2008 (a third as quickly as American wages). More trouble could lie ahead, if AI displaces the legions of white-collar knowledge workers who make up the British economy’s backbone.
Low growth is also bad for Britain’s ailing public finances. Public spending has risen from 39% of GDP in 2019-20 to 45% today. An ageing population and rising defence commitments could push it higher still. Tax revenues (37% of GDP) are struggling to cover this largesse. Nor will greater borrowing help. Debt interest this year will cost £109bn ($143bn), more than the education budget. Bond investors charge Britain higher interest rates than any other big rich country, and jump at the slightest hint of profligacy.
None of these problems is insurmountable. But bold policies are needed to get Britain out of its rut. This includes tackling high health-care and welfare costs, pragmatism on net zero and cutting the red tape that stops things being built. Mr Streeting’s aborted campaign set out serious plans. If Mr Burnham appointed him chancellor, that would signal a willingness to embrace growth.
The problem is that these policies cut against Mr Burnham’s instincts, which are more aligned with those of Ed Miliband, another contender for chancellor, whose views are more statist. Capitalising on AI will require creative destruction, letting unproductive firms fail and freeing workers to move to more AI-friendly jobs. Mr Burnham seems instinctively opposed to the deregulation needed to achieve this. His allies are calling for even stronger protections of workers’ rights than were introduced by Sir Keir.
Such wrong-headedness can be seen elsewhere. Mr Burnham has argued that “undue weight” is given to planning reform, preferring an expensive state house-building programme (it is unclear how he would fund this). He wants to reindustrialise the economy, a romantic idea which ignores the fact that Britain’s comparative advantage lies in services.
Mr Burnham’s fiscal instincts do not suggest a man willing to make the tough choices. Whereas Sir Keir’s problems started when he accepted freebies for himself, Mr Burnham’s undoing might come from offering too many to other people. At a rally on June 19th he promised to bring down “water bills, energy bills, rail fares”. He claims savings would come from bringing these industries under greater public control. But costs are driven up by the need to improve dilapidated infrastructure and the net-zero push, not ownership structures. In reality lower bills can be funded only through reduced investment (contradicting his own pledges) or higher subsidies.
It is unclear how Mr Burnham could afford such subsidies while also increasing defence spending (another thing he has said yes to). The aspiring prime minister has committed to Sir Keir’s manifesto pledge not to raise employment taxes or VAT (yes!), but also wants to protect the triple lock, an expensive ratchet for increasing the state pension, (yes! yes! yes!). He even endorses the least deserving causes, like the women protesting against pension-age increases that they were told about decades in advance (though he has since backtracked there, too). The only area he really says that he wants to save money from is working-age welfare, but he is vague on specific measures.
A few of Mr Burnham’s instincts are welcome. True, his partisanship for the north may become tiresome. And some of his regional policies, like legally requiring Westminster to prove its decisions always reduce regional inequality, are barmy. But he is correct to identify over-centralisation as a drag on England’s regions, and to push for greater fiscal devolution. He is also right to want to reform Britain’s broken property-tax system and its shamefully patchy provision of social care (though again he shies away from the painful measures this would require).
Might being prime minister stiffen Mr Burnham’s backbone? His reported appointment of James Purnell, a pragmatic veteran of Sir Tony Blair’s government, as his chief of staff augurs well. A much-touted speech on the economy next week will give him the chance to flesh out his vision. But if the man who likes to say yes fails to make the necessary trade-offs, he need only look at Sir Keir to see the fate that awaits him.
