Burnham’s first PMQs live: New PM faces Badenoch for first time as cost of UK borrowing rises – watch live
Developing story first seen 3 hours ago
Andy Burnham's first Prime Minister's Questions saw him raise fresh concerns over the EU's "Made In Europe" agenda, warning it "could pose significant problems for British steel" while insisting he wants a "closer relationship" with Brussels, with farming and steel deals topping his agenda for talks with the bloc. Political commentary on the session noted a marked change in tone from the Starmer era, with Burnham seen as warmer and more willing to directly answer questions, appearing to unsettle Kemi Badenoch's usual combative approach — though he still invoked the Liz Truss government when pressed on the economy.
The session also saw Burnham face continued scrutiny over tax and spending: he declined to rule out further tax rises in October's Budget, prompting Badenoch to accuse him of being a "spendthrift" "people-pleaser" spooking the markets, while ex-NatWest chairman Sir Howard Davies separately warned the pension triple lock was unaffordable amid rising borrowing costs. On Europe, the EU has already cut tariff-free steel import quotas by 47 per cent to 18.3 million tonnes a year, with the UK matching this by lowering its own quota by 51 per cent and imposing a 50 per cent tariff on excess imports, while Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey urged Burnham to pursue single market membership.
- Burnham warns EU steel rules could harm UK industry, wants closer EU ties
- Commentators say his PMQs tone was warmer, harder for Badenoch to attack
- He still wouldn't rule out tax rises; triple lock affordability also questioned
New here? Start with this
Andy Burnham became Prime Minister only weeks ago and this was his first appearance at Prime Minister's Questions, the weekly session in the House of Commons where MPs, especially the Leader of the Opposition, question the PM directly. Kemi Badenoch, who leads the Conservative Party, used the session to challenge him, while Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, also put questions to him. PMQs is closely watched as an early test of how a new leader handles pressure and defends their government's record.
The backdrop is a period of financial strain for the UK government. The cost of government borrowing has been rising, which makes it more expensive for the state to fund public spending and increases scrutiny of tax and spending decisions ahead of the Budget, the government's annual statement on tax and spending plans, due in October. Part of this debate concerns the pension "triple lock", a policy that guarantees the state pension rises each year in line with whichever is highest out of inflation, average wage growth, or 2.5%; some economists argue this is becoming too costly to maintain.
Also relevant is the long-running debate over Britain's departure from the European Union, known as Brexit, and its effect on economic growth, as well as ongoing pressures on the National Health Service, including shortages of midwives affecting maternity services in some areas. These issues, alongside fiscal policy, are shaping how Burnham is being judged in his early days as Prime Minister.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Those broadly sympathetic to Burnham's caution argue that a new government should not be bounced into rash commitments during its first weeks, and that keeping options open ahead of a proper Budget process is responsible governance rather than evasion. They contend that protections such as the pension triple lock exist precisely to shield pensioners from cost-of-living pressures and years of erosion, and that unpicking it, or ruling out revenue-raising measures before the fiscal facts are set out, would be reckless. On health and Europe, they would argue that acknowledging structural NHS staffing shortages honestly, and seeking closer, practical EU trade arrangements for hard-hit sectors like steel and farming, shows a willingness to address root causes rather than offer easy but hollow promises.
The case against
Critics who share Badenoch's and Davies' concerns argue that rising borrowing costs are a market verdict on fiscal credibility, and that a Prime Minister who will not rule out tax rises, nor address unsustainable commitments like the triple lock, risks confirming investors' worst fears and pushing costs higher still. They would say that clear, disciplined choices, even unpopular ones, are what markets and voters actually need from a new government, and that vague reassurances read as an unwillingness to make hard decisions. On the EU and NHS points, they might argue that structural excuses cannot indefinitely substitute for concrete fixes, and that re-litigating Brexit or single market access risks reopening a settled and divisive question rather than focusing on domestic delivery.
Full account
Andy Burnham faced Kemi Badenoch across the despatch box for the first time on Wednesday, in a Prime Minister's Questions dominated by concern over the rising cost of government borrowing. The Conservative leader accused the new prime minister of being a "people pleaser" and a "spendthrift", telling MPs that financial markets were unnerved by his approach to public spending. Mr Burnham would not rule out further tax increases in the Budget due on 28 October, saying he had already signalled an intention to cut taxes but that, like any prime minister, he would not set out Budget measures during the session.
Badenoch challenged Mr Burnham to identify a single spending demand from his own backbenchers that he had turned down, casting him as unwilling to say no to his party. He replied that he wanted to reduce the number of young people not in education, employment or training, and that he could not defend the current welfare bill, though he stopped short of detailing where savings might come from. The sparring took place against a backdrop of gilt yields climbing to multi-decade highs, with the former NatWest chairman Sir Howard Davies warning separately that the state pension triple lock was unaffordable and that the government needed to demonstrate a clearer fiscal direction to reassure markets.
Beyond the fiscal exchanges, Mr Burnham used the session to restate commitments to meet existing defence spending targets and to abandon the previous government's digital ID scheme. Pressed on tackling antisocial behaviour, including dangerous driving, he voiced support for a "broken window" style of policing, pointing to Greater Manchester's Operation Vulcan as a model that could be extended nationally and floating tighter regulation of fireworks. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey raised the prolonged closure of a maternity unit in North Devon, blamed on staff shortages that have forced women to travel up to two hours to give birth; Mr Burnham acknowledged longstanding midwife shortages nationally and said the health secretary was reviewing the issue.
The appearance came as economists warned of a difficult backdrop for the new administration, with Chancellor John Healey reportedly needing to close a gap of up to £14 billion at the Budget through some combination of tax rises and spending restraint. Analysts pointed to a mix of pressures pushing up borrowing costs globally, including renewed fighting involving Iran, persistent inflation and jitters over a possible correction in AI-related markets, while suggesting the UK was particularly exposed. Commentary from figures such as former minister and economist Jim O'Neill added to the sense of scrutiny on the new prime minister's fiscal credibility as he settles into the role.
Where outlets differ
The Independent leads with Burnham's direct quotes and gives more weight to policy substance raised at PMQs itself — his comments on antisocial behaviour/'broken window' policing, fireworks regulation, defence spending, digital ID, and the North Devon maternity unit exchange with Ed Davey.
The Daily Mail focuses more heavily on the political and market drama, framing Burnham's PMQs debut and preceding Commons statement as 'blustering' and criticised even by allies, and gives prominence to external criticism from economist Jim O'Neill and to gilt market movements.
The Mail provides more detail on the wider economic backdrop (Iran conflict, inflation, AI correction fears, the estimated £14bn fiscal gap facing Chancellor John Healey) and Badenoch's exact 'delightful'/'people pleaser' jibe, whereas the Independent emphasises Sir Howard Davies's separate warning on the pension triple lock and quotes Burnham's health-service comments in greater depth.
More coverage