Andy Burnham admits he would have liked more radical first budget
Andy Burnham said his first budget as prime minister was less radical than he wanted because economic volatility and geopolitical crises limited the government’s options. He argued that the measures still offered meaningful help, while critics said the budget did too little on living costs, welfare and defence.
Chancellor John Healey announced a £100 energy payment for most households, alongside other relatively low-cost measures. Burnham said he wanted higher energy support and major welfare reform, but ruled out “brutal cuts” and said most people in their twenties should not need benefits unless disability or other circumstances prevent work. He also cited Labour’s 2024 manifesto, which ruled out raising income tax, national insurance or VAT, and said he would seek his own mandate for different policies.
In short
- Burnham says uncertainty constrained his first budget.
- Most households will receive £100 towards energy bills.
- He plans welfare reform and may seek a new mandate.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Given economic volatility and geopolitical crises, a cautious first budget can be defended as a way to offer households practical help without making promises the government cannot afford. The £100 energy payment provides some relief, while avoiding brutal welfare cuts and respecting the manifesto’s tax commitments may protect people facing hardship and maintain public trust.
The case against
Critics can argue that modest, low-cost measures fall short when households face high living costs and the government itself acknowledges that stronger energy support is needed. They may also say that limited action on welfare and defence leaves pressing problems unresolved, and that the government should seek a fresh mandate if its existing commitments prevent a more ambitious response.