Andy Burnham has attacked the Conservatives' plan to save £36 billion a year from welfare, warning it would leave people "in absolute crisis" and heap pressure on the police, A&E units and the criminal justice system. "If you just go to brutal cuts, you will leave people in absolute crisis and then they will be going into other services in a chaotic way," the Prime Minister told ITV News in an interview marking his first 100 days.
Mr Burnham refused to put "a number before people" when asked how far it should fall. John Healey, the Chancellor, has said "there will be a reduction in the benefits bill", but Treasury officials refused to set a timeline, and The Times reports the bill will not fall before the election. Downing Street said the Government was not "setting an arbitrary target or timetable on that".
The Conservatives have published a quantified target. Labour has not published a comparable overall welfare savings target, a timetable for reducing total expenditure or a fully costed plan demonstrating how its proposed reforms will deliver the promised reduction.
The forecast behind the promise
The Office for Budget Responsibility expects welfare spending to rise by £19 billion this year to £353 billion, and to reach £431 billion by 2031-32. Much of it is the state pension, roughly four pounds in every ten. The fastest-growing pressure is sickness and disability provision, which the OBR warned could reach £100 billion a year before the end of the decade. Last month's Budget contained no measures to reduce it.
The £36 billion alternative
The Savings Plan Kemi Badenoch announced at last month's Conservative conference identifies £71 billion of annual savings across government, £36 billion of it from welfare, to fund 3 per cent defence spending by 2030 and deficit reduction. The welfare element is an eight-point programme: ending benefits for foreign nationals, an estimated £9.5 billion saving, while honouring EU settled-status rights under the withdrawal agreement; restricting disability claims for low-level mental health conditions such as anxiety and mild depression, with face-to-face assessments returning; moving fit note assessments from GPs to occupational health specialists; and sending under-25s leaving education into a Get to Work programme rather than onto Universal Credit.
The £36 billion is the party's own estimate, revised upwards from £23 billion a year earlier. It is a proposal, not enacted policy. Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: "Andy Burnham would rather defend a bloated benefits bill than tackle the spiralling cost of welfare. Only the Conservatives have a plan to cut the welfare bill and deliver £36 billion of savings per year to make sure the system works for the taxpayers who pay for it."
Labour's record, and two reviews
The last government to set a welfare number failed to meet it: Labour. In March 2025 Sir Keir Starmer's government published its Pathways to Work green paper, built on roughly £5 billion of annual savings. That July a backbench rebellion forced concessions that analysts warned wiped out the savings while the bill kept rising. Labour's previous retreat provides a stark political backdrop to Mr Burnham's refusal to commit to a savings figure.
The Government's answer this time is two reviews, both due within weeks. Alan Milburn's youth unemployment review is expected to call for billions more in employment support under an "invest to save" model, though Mr Milburn has said ministers should cut welfare spending to fund it. The scale of the problem is not in dispute: the ONS counted 981,000 young people aged 16 to 24 not in education, employment or training in the spring, one in eight. Mr Milburn's review puts the total annual cost to the country at £125 billion, a figure built mostly from lost economic output, including permanent scarring, rather than public spending. Sir Stephen Timms's review of personal independence payment, whose interim report found the benefit "no longer fit for purpose", reports this month. It was not tasked with finding savings, according to the Telegraph's reporting. One is expected to recommend new spending with no savings target attached; the other was never asked what it could save.
Labour has criticised the Conservatives' proposed savings but has yet to provide a comparable figure of its own. Great British PAC is calling on the Government to publish a measurable welfare savings target, a credible timetable and the financial evidence behind its plans. British taxpayers deserve to know not merely what ministers intend to do, but what their policies will cost and when they will deliver results.
GREAT BRITISH PAC REACTION
Claire Bullivant, Chief Executive Officer of Great British PAC, said:
"Andy Burnham's argument is as insulting as it is absurd. Apparently, asking people to work rather than depend indefinitely on the taxpayer will turn them into criminals. What an utterly disgraceful view of the British people.
"This is a Labour Government that releases convicted criminals early, presides over a welfare bill spiralling out of control, makes immigration concessions that will increase future costs to taxpayers, and then has the sheer audacity to lecture the rest of us about crime.
"Labour has turned Britain into a country where working hard is punished, dependency is subsidised and criminals are let out early because the state cannot accommodate them. Meanwhile, businesses are being hammered, jobs are being destroyed and the people funding this catastrophic experiment are being squeezed until the pips squeak.
"Burnham's solution? No targets. No deadlines. No savings. No plan. Just another blank cheque signed by the British taxpayer.
"The truth is Labour doesn't have the backbone to reform welfare, the competence to grow the economy or the courage to put law-abiding British people first.
"Britain doesn't have a shortage of money. It has a Government with a catastrophic shortage of common sense, economic competence and respect for the people footing the bill.
"Labour is tough on workers, soft on criminals and utterly reckless with our money. And Andy Burnham has just demonstrated exactly why.“