Manchester mayor faces funding questions over cost-of-living measures
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
Andy Burnham has pledged to crack down on "rip-off" subscription traps and deceptive discounts as part of a wider cost-of-living package, but the plans have drawn criticism over their cost and how they will be funded. Rules requiring firms to make subscriptions easier to cancel and to disclose costs more clearly, rather than quietly auto-renewing at higher prices, will now take effect from January instead of next spring, alongside a consultation on banning deceptive discount practices via the Competition and Markets Authority. Opposition figures dismissed his accompanying August tour as a "vanity tour" offering mere "tinkering", calling instead for broader tax cuts, while economists have warned there is little room to borrow further to cover such commitments.
The subscription reforms sit alongside other unfunded pledges from Burnham's first week in office, including a 20 per cent business rate cut for pubs, clubs and live music venues, expected to cost around £100m a year, a VAT cut on electricity bills, and bus fares capped at £2 from January. Citizens Advice, which found 26 per cent of UK adults had accidentally taken out a subscription in a year, welcomed the changes, which the government says could save households £14 a month. Chancellor John Healey, who also faces a £4.7bn shortfall in defence spending, has said his first Budget, on 28 October, will be "built on fiscal discipline", after the NIESR think tank warned ministers there is "no capacity to borrow any more".
- Burnham brings forward subscription-trap and discount reforms to January
- Opposition brands his cost-of-living tour a "vanity tour"
- Funding unclear amid £100m rate cut and £4.7bn defence shortfall
New here? Start with this
Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, has been promoting a package of measures aimed at easing living costs, including plans to make it harder for companies to trap customers in unwanted subscriptions and to cut business rates for pubs, clubs and music venues. The subscription rules themselves come from central government, tightening how firms handle auto-renewals and discounts, but Burnham's wider package has raised questions about who will pay for it.
The row centres on money: Burnham's proposals, including the £100m-a-year business rate cut, do not yet have a clear source of funding. This matters because the government's finances are already stretched, with chancellor John Healey dealing with a shortfall in the defence budget and preparing his first Budget for 28 October, which he says will prioritise financial restraint over new spending commitments.
Critics, including opposition politicians and independent economists, argue there is little room to borrow more and have questioned whether Burnham's tour to publicise the measures amounts to meaningful help or largely symbolic gestures. Consumer groups such as Citizens Advice have separately welcomed the underlying subscription reforms, which are designed to stop people being charged for services they no longer want or forgot they had signed up to.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters would argue that tackling subscription traps and deceptive discounts is a genuine, low-cost win for households, given that a quarter of UK adults say they have been caught out by an unwanted subscription, and that requiring clearer disclosure and easier cancellation is straightforward consumer protection rather than reckless spending. They would add that targeted measures such as business rate relief for pubs, clubs and music venues help preserve valued community and cultural spaces during a difficult economic period, and that a mayor actively engaging the public on living costs, even via a high-profile tour, is a legitimate and visible way of using the office to champion residents' interests.
The case against
Critics would argue that announcing a raft of popular measures without a clear funding plan is fiscally irresponsible at a time when the Treasury is already grappling with a multibillion-pound shortfall and economists are warning there is no further room to borrow. They would say a publicity-heavy tour risks looking like presentation over substance when the underlying policies amount to modest tinkering, and that broader, simpler tax cuts would deliver more meaningful and equitable relief to households than a patchwork of consumer-protection rules and sector-specific subsidies whose costs, they contend, will eventually be borne by taxpayers regardless.
More coverage
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by The Independent as “Burnham vows to tackle ‘rip-off’ subscriptions in cost-of-living crackdown”.