Why Burnham can succeed on slashing the welfare bill where Starmer failed

TThere is no such thing as prime ministers trying to repeat the mistakes of their predecessors to confuse the political atmosphere.

But it looks like Andy Burnham, just a week into his premiership, is ready to take the risk.

There are many candidates in the great debate over what is the nail in the coffin of Keir Starmer’s two-year premiership.

The list of indignities includes gifts from Lord Alli, poor voting, the withholding of pensioners’ winter fuel payments and the appointment of Peter Mandelson, a known associate of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

But in reality what happened to Sir Keir Starmer happened a year ago; It happened when a major backroom revolt forced him to backtrack on slashing benefits and slashing £5bn a year from the burgeoning benefits bill.

When Sir Keir was finally forced to concede defeat just before the 2025 summer break, he instantly lost his authority as party leader and prime minister. Worse, he lost control of the country’s political agenda and finances.

At a time when international events such as the war in Ukraine and unrest in the Middle East are making the situation worse, Britain’s already high debt and failure to deliver economic growth have left its government no room for manoeuvre.

In addition, he fell prey to his own backbenchers, who were forced to spend even more on social assistance by removing the two-child benefit limit.

It was no coincidence that the left-wing MPs at the heart of the welfare rebellion were also Andy Burnham’s leading cheerleaders in this month’s Makerfield by-election to replace Sir Keir.

But despite the humiliation suffered by his predecessor, Mr Burnham used his first major interview with the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg to signal that he wanted to take another step towards reducing welfare.

So why does he think he can succeed where Sir Keir has failed so spectacularly?

For the sake of the sanity of Labor MPs, you must hope that Mr Burnham will not rely solely on cheerful cracks from his northern routine to achieve this.

Videos of the blind tasting of pub snacks or the display of a personal art collection in Number 10 North might generate a flood of likes and make Labor MPs feel a little happier, but it won’t replace substantive debates on policy or engage with letters, emails and social media posts from voters who will be left without benefits.

We should have seen Mr Burnham’s intentions in keeping Pat McFadden in as welfare minister rather than sacking the other 11 Starmerites from the cabinet with ruthless efficiency.

In a now-infamous text to Peter Mandelson, Mr McFadden dismissed Labour’s welfare rebels: “Every meeting I have had is ‘Who can we tax to benefit others?’ There is a question. They’re asking the wrong questions.”

If we look carefully at what Mr. Burnham now says to Ms. Kuenssberg, it is clear that he plans to be harsh.

He said: “What you’ve got is the welfare bill. I think as a country we have to be really serious about reducing welfare.”

And we know how to do this by making well-being conditional on work.

“This is about changing the nature of the support and making some of it dependent on people taking up the opportunities that are presented to them. So you can increase the conditions for getting the benefits. I think it’s a good thing that the government is guaranteeing opportunities for young people.”

Still, there are important differences. Mr. Burnham does not put a figure on savings; This was a mistake made by Sir Keir, his chancellor Rachel Reeves and the then welfare minister Liz Kendall in identifying the £5bn.

By doing this, the previous government discussed money, not what was best for claimants.

And to this avail, Mr. Burnham goes out of his way to insist that it is society that is failing those who demand it, not them who are to blame.

After all, political and economic realities are the same. The welfare bill needs to fall dramatically if the country is to fund things like fixing social care, ending rough sleeping, increasing defense spending, cuts to business rates for pubs, £2 bus fare caps, VAT cuts on energy bills and the next policy Mr Burnham unveils.

The big thing Mr Burnham has on his side now is that it will be very difficult for Labor to replace another leader before the next election. Their system is much more difficult than the Conservatives and we all know what happened to the Conservatives after many changes.

So perhaps with the right language and some early good vibes, Mr. Burnham will be able to make the necessary and unpopular tough decisions on outreach.

But you still can’t bet against a riot on this one with Sir Keir cackling mercilessly in the background.