Andy Burnham said he would not rule out tax rises as he set out plans to overhaul adult social care in England, after years of what he called government inaction.

Speaking as the prime minister, Burnham described it as a “major dereliction of public duty” that successive administrations had failed to address the crisis. He said funding decisions would be “difficult”, but insisted he was determined to “get it right”.

His proposals include creating a new national care service, improving pay and training for care workers, and bringing adult social care into closer alignment with the NHS. Burnham also said a review of social care led by Baroness Casey would be published next summer rather than in 2028.

Funding Approach And Pay Commitments

After his speech, Burnham told reporters that he wanted to pursue reforms using existing budgets before considering new funding through taxes.

He said supporters of the changes should be able to answer whether the government was “doing everything we can do from within what we’ve got” before discussing tax rises. He added that announcements on pay and training for the social care workforce would be “fully funded”.

However, he said the wider programme would still require “difficult decisions”, which he said would be put to the country “at the right time” with the aim of proceeding with public consent.

Burnham said his preferred outcome would be to avoid forcing families to sell their homes to pay for care. He described home sales as an “really awful process”, and said proposals he previously raised when he was health secretary in 2009 were intended to reduce that risk.

He added that under an NHS-style model, he argued, people would contribute a little so that more of what they had “worked for” could be protected.

Baroness Casey Review Moves Earlier

Burnham said Baroness Casey’s review should consider how a national care service could be paid for and should look at ways to build a system that becomes “highly integrated” with the NHS.

The prime minister said he wants to focus “immediately” on the care workforce, pointing to an incoming fair pay agreement due to begin in 2028/29. He described it as a key “building block” of a national care service.

Adult social care provides support to help people live more independently, including assistance at home. Unlike the NHS, it is not free at the point of use. In England and Northern Ireland, people with savings worth more than £23,250 are not entitled to help with care costs from their council, while eligibility rules differ in Wales and Scotland.

Burnham said progress on cross-party solutions had failed repeatedly over decades, describing 22 attempts to make headway in almost 30 years. He said lasting reform would require parties to find “common ground”.

Cross-Party Talks And Funding Red Lines

Burnham held talks with Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey and Conservative shadow health secretary Stuart Andrew, aiming to secure cross-party backing for changes. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch did not attend. The prime minister did not invite Reform UK or the Green Party of England and Wales.

Andrew told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme that it was important for any funding plan to set “red lines”. He said finding money would be difficult but added there was “a significant amount of money in the system” that was not “in the right place”.

Sir Ed said the first “constructive” discussion left him feeling “hopeful” and that more meetings would be needed to build consensus. He said any solution had to place family carers “at its heart”, adding that his own disabled son needs round-the-clock care. He also said people would have to accept changes they may not like in order to agree a deal.

Reform leader Nigel Farage said his party was not invited because the government did not want to hear a “fresh” reforming voice. He said Reform would oppose a “death tax” and argued that “efficiencies” could reduce the cost of social care, while also saying delivery should be handled by local councils rather than being “centralised in Whitehall”.

Green social care spokesperson Ellie Chowns said if Burnham was serious about tackling the crisis differently, he should work with the Greens and other parties.

Join the discussion?

30 July 2026

View full article

3 hours ago, webfact said:

He added that under an NHS-style model, he argued, people would contribute a little so that more of what they had “worked for” could be protected

So he wants to raise taxes to pay for his unfunded social care promise? On top of the 5% additional council tax that was alleged to cover social care costs? A tax increase not detailed in the Labour manifesto to pay for something not in the manifesto?

In the words of the man himself...

Nor should he.

Social care needs fixing.

17 minutes ago, James105 said:

So he wants to raise taxes to pay for his unfunded social care promise? On top of the 5% additional council tax that was alleged to cover social care costs? A tax increase not detailed in the Labour manifesto to pay for something not in the manifesto?

In the words of the man himself...

You seem to have missed Burnham has not presented a social care program, it is therefore not yet a thing and so not unfunded.

His statement that he will not rule out tax increases to pay for social care is an indication that he does not intend the policy to be unfunded.

Burnham has correctly identified that social care needs urgent reform, he’s seeking cross party consensus on how to fix this urgent problem.

And incase it hasn’t dawned on you, millions of people are already paying for the failure of social care services.

Social care needs reform, Burnham is onto a winner.

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Nor should he.

Social care needs fixing.

Easy enough, just kick out all of the invaders who are leeching off the British subjects.

Utterly predictable.

This sixth form socialist is a radical leftist. He's going to bankrupt Britain like they all do. Then blame it on the Tories. He still dresses and acts and thinks like he's in the common room waiting for Sociology class.

Britain has become a welfare state with a country attached to it.

The bloodless coup was a disgrace. We need an election, just as Burnham himself demanded when the Tories changed leader.

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You seem to have missed Burnham has not presented a social care program, it is therefore not yet a thing and so not unfunded.

His statement that he will not rule out tax increases to pay for social care is an indication that he does not intend the policy to be unfunded.

Burnham has correctly identified that social care needs urgent reform, he’s seeking cross party consensus on how to fix this urgent problem.

And incase it hasn’t dawned on you, millions of people are already paying for the failure of social care services.

Social care needs reform, Burnham is onto a winner.

Yes, yes. Maybe social care is an urgent problem. Others would suggest the invasion at the borders is an urgent problem. Some would point to the highest energy prices in the world being an urgent problem that needs solving. Others still might suggest the welfare bill being higher than the income tax receipts is an urgent problem.

The fact is there are numerous urgent problems. They cannot all be solved at once so what happens is that political parties present their solutions to these urgent problems in document called a "Manifesto". The public then get to see this Manifesto and then vote accordingly based on the promises in the Manifesto.

When someone becomes PM via a coup or more legitimate means (such as a leadership election) and they wish to enact radical changes they should create a document called a "Manifesto". This Manifesto should include these policies in and how they are going to be funded. If the public agree that social care is the most urgent problem that needs solving and agree its worth paying more tax for (rather than making cuts to welfare, foreign aid and illegal immigrant benefits etc) then Burnham will legitimately have a mandate to enact this policy.

So as the "great" man said. General Election Now!

Edited July 30Jul 30 by James105

11 minutes ago, James105 said:

Yes, yes. Maybe social care is an urgent problem. Others would suggest the invasion at the borders is an urgent problem. Some would point to the highest energy prices in the world being an urgent problem that needs solving. Others still might suggest the welfare bill being higher than the income tax receipts is an urgent problem.

The fact is there are numerous urgent problems. They cannot all be solved at once so what happens is that political parties present their solutions to these urgent problems in document called a "Manifesto". The public then get to see this Manifesto and then vote accordingly based on the promises in the Manifesto.

When someone becomes an MP via a coup or more legitimate means (such as a leadership election) and they wish to enact radical changes they should create a document called a "Manifesto". This Manifesto should include these policies in and how they are going to be funded. If the public agree that social care is the most urgent problem that needs solving and agree its worth paying more tax for (rather than making cuts to welfare, foreign aid and illegal immigrant benefits etc) then Burnham will legitimately have a mandate to enact this policy.

So as the "great" man said. General Election Now!

That could be a problem, as the "Great Man" is revolving so hard in his grave after 14 years of Tory misrule.

51 minutes ago, technoronin said:

Easy enough, just kick out all of the invaders who are leeching off the British subjects.

Straight to the immigrunting.

Here’s another option, take care of your own dear old mum.

43 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Utterly predictable.

This sixth form socialist is a radical leftist. He's going to bankrupt Britain like they all do. Then blame it on the Tories. He still dresses and acts and thinks like he's in the common room waiting for Sociology class.

Britain has become a welfare state with a country attached to it.

The bloodless coup was a disgrace. We need an election, just as Burnham himself demanded when the Tories changed leader.

Utterly predictable.

Social care needs urgent reform, Burnham has invited cross party discussion and negotiations on a way forward.

Jonny trots out an argument that even the sixth form smoking club would dismiss as tge nonsense it is.

Social care needs reform, it’s already costing the NHS billions, it’s already costing millions of people money they can’t afford.

Time to reform social care and provide Britain’s aged population the care it needs - Shock horror, it will need paying for.

Burnham is onto a winner.

The Burnham' bounce will end up as flat as a witches tit despite frantic pumping, as he already said he is sticking to the manifesto so it can't possibly be a happy ending GE NOW.

35 minutes ago, James105 said:

Yes, yes. Maybe social care is an urgent problem. Others would suggest the invasion at the borders is an urgent problem. Some would point to the highest energy prices in the world being an urgent problem that needs solving. Others still might suggest the welfare bill being higher than the income tax receipts is an urgent problem.

The fact is there are numerous urgent problems. They cannot all be solved at once so what happens is that political parties present their solutions to these urgent problems in document called a "Manifesto". The public then get to see this Manifesto and then vote accordingly based on the promises in the Manifesto.

When someone becomes PM via a coup or more legitimate means (such as a leadership election) and they wish to enact radical changes they should create a document called a "Manifesto". This Manifesto should include these policies in and how they are going to be funded. If the public agree that social care is the most urgent problem that needs solving and agree its worth paying more tax for (rather than making cuts to welfare, foreign aid and illegal immigrant benefits etc) then Burnham will legitimately have a mandate to enact this policy.

So as the "great" man said. General Election Now!

Yes there are lots of other problems to deal with, but this one is particularly problematic, it has real life negative consequences for millions of people.

And here’s the bit that might worry some.

The people most impacted by the failings in social care are predominantly in late middle age/old age.

People in real need of help, and coincidentally a demographic that predominantly votes Tory and or Reform/Restore. The people who’s savings, inheritance is at risk from the failings of social care are also a predominantly rightwing voting demographic.

Reforming social care is urgently necessary, politically savvy and it’s the right thing to do.

Burnham is onto a winner.

6 minutes ago, Tidal wave said:

The Burnham' bounce will end up as flat as a witches tit despite frantic pumping, as he already said he is sticking to the manifesto so it can't possibly be a happy ending GE NOW.

So it’s you who had the forum crystal ball.

1 hour ago, technoronin said:

Easy enough, just kick out all of the invaders who are leeching off the British subjects.

Indeed, but it appears thing are getting worse?

"Gormless French cops watch on as 1,000 illegal migrants head for UK hours after PM claimed small boats plan was working"

"A FLOTILLA of up to 1,000 migrants headed for Britain as French cops watched on despite getting more than £1billion from UK taxpayers to stop them.

The fresh influx came a day after PM Andy Burnham insisted Labour’s plan to clamp down on illegal migration was working."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/39910227/french-cops-watch-1000-migrants-head-for-uk/

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Reforming social care is urgently necessary, politically savvy and it’s the right thing to do.

Burnham is onto a winner.

Sure, if the money saved from cutting welfare, cutting the NHS budget, removing benefits from illegal immigrants, reducing the size of the state, putting the 2 child benefit cap back in place and stopping foreign aid etc was diverted into something that is "urgently necessary" I am sure it would be a winning policy. It does not sound like this is the approach that will be used to fund it though.

Raising taxes on working people (again) so working people earn less during a "cost of living crisis" whilst non-workers on welfare remain unaffected by this policy is definitely not a winning policy. It will require a mandate, so as Burnham himself said.... General Election Now!

37 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Indeed, but it appears thing are getting worse?

"Gormless French cops watch on as 1,000 illegal migrants head for UK hours after PM claimed small boats plan was working"

"A FLOTILLA of up to 1,000 migrants headed for Britain as French cops watched on despite getting more than £1billion from UK taxpayers to stop them.

The fresh influx came a day after PM Andy Burnham insisted Labour’s plan to clamp down on illegal migration was working."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/39910227/french-cops-watch-1000-migrants-head-for-uk/

We should have a thread in that.

31 minutes ago, James105 said:

Sure, if the money saved from cutting welfare, cutting the NHS budget, removing benefits from illegal immigrants, reducing the size of the state, putting the 2 child benefit cap back in place and stopping foreign aid etc was diverted into something that is "urgently necessary" I am sure it would be a winning policy. It does not sound like this is the approach that will be used to fund it though.

Raising taxes on working people (again) so working people earn less during a "cost of living crisis" whilst non-workers on welfare remain unaffected by this policy is definitely not a winning policy. It will require a mandate, so as Burnham himself said.... General Election Now!

The majority of people dealing aged parents in need of social care are ‘working people’.

All of the rest of your suggestions are exactly what the Tories tried under the heading ‘Austerity’, the result was a collapse in public services, rising poverty and generally destroying society.

Edited July 30Jul 30 by Chomper Higgot

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The majority of people dealing aged parents in need of social care are ‘working people’.

All of the rest of your suggestions are exactly what the Tories tried under the heading ‘Austerity’, the result was a collapse in public services, rising poverty and generally destroying society.

The Tories had a mandate for austerity though. It was literally in their manifesto and people voted for it after recognizing Labour were going to bankrupt the country with their incessant spending after the financial crash. Not that it was really austerity as they still had a massive deficit increasing the national debt but whatever.

Anyhow, Burnham does not have a mandate for this. Which is why if he wants to tax people more he needs to create a new manifesto and call a (in his own words) "general election now" and let the people decide if they want to pay more tax or choose another approach which pays for it by cutting excessive, avoidable and unnecessary spending elsewhere.

29 minutes ago, James105 said:

The Tories had a mandate for austerity though. It was literally in their manifesto and people voted for it after recognizing Labour were going to bankrupt the country with their incessant spending after the financial crash. Not that it was really austerity as they still had a massive deficit increasing the national debt but whatever.

Anyhow, Burnham does not have a mandate for this. Which is why if he wants to tax people more he needs to create a new manifesto and call a (in his own words) "general election now" and let the people decide if they want to pay more tax or choose another approach which pays for it by cutting excessive, avoidable and unnecessary spending elsewhere.

Reform of social care is included in the 2024 Labour Party Manifesto.

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Reform of social care is included in the 2024 Labour Party Manifesto.

So you have awareness of their manifesto which you believe gives him a mandate. Now what did Labour say about tax rises on working people in their 2024 Labour Party Manifesto?

Am I missing something here? I've not seen or heard Burnham state he will or will not increase taxes to pay for any social care changes. He can't yet know the cost of changes? How can he? The cross-party (with exceptions) discussions have not completed. Baroness Casey's Report is not yet available.

All I do know, from personal experience, is that social care in the UK is in a disgusting mess. A disgusting mess caused and/or perpetuated by successive governments of all colours. At some point that merry-go-round needs to get stopped. Burnham is going to try. All others before him, as far back as I can remember, have utterly and disgustingly failed. I hope Burnham succeeds. Do I believe he will? Hmmm...

Just now, James105 said:

So you have awareness of their manifesto which you believe gives him a mandate. Now what did Labour say about tax rises on working people in their 2024 Labour Party Manifesto?

Election on the basis of the manifesto is the mandate.

What did Burnham actually say about putting up taxes?

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Election on the basis of the manifesto is the mandate.

What did Burnham actually say about putting up taxes?

Ok so you don't want to answer what Labour said about taxes. Here is the exact wording to help you out from the Labour 2024 manifesto:

"Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase National Insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT."

So when asked if he will raise taxes to pay for this there are only 2 correct answers:

1. Absolutely no tax rises as that is what was promised in the 2024 manifesto.

2. Yes it will have to be paid for with tax rises which is why a new general election will be called so people can vote for it.

The incorrect answer was to say he wouldn't rule out tax rises as he has no mandate for it. Hope that helps.

Edited July 30Jul 30 by James105

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The people who’s savings, inheritance is at risk from the failings of social care are also a predominantly rightwing voting demographic.

Their savings and inheritance are at risk from mad socialists like Burnham.

He's going to tax the life out of anyone who has worked hard all their life to accumulate even the smallest amount of wealth, and then give it to people who sit at home all day watching Daytime TV and gaming the system. Many of whom are illegal immigrants and fake asylum seekers.

He doesn't have a clue what he's doing. Moreover, he doesn't have a mandate to do any of this.

General Election now. Just as Burnham himself called for when the Tories changed leader.

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Utterly predictable.

Social care needs urgent reform, Burnham has invited cross party discussion and negotiations on a way forward.

Jonny trots out an argument that even the sixth form smoking club would dismiss as tge nonsense it is.

Social care needs reform, it’s already costing the NHS billions, it’s already costing millions of people money they can’t afford.

Time to reform social care and provide Britain’s aged population the care it needs - Shock horror, it will need paying for.

Burnham is onto a winner.

He's not reforming anything. He's just spending more of other people's money on it.

Classic socialist.

He's going to bankrupt Britain and he doesn't even have a mandate.

A General Election has already being ruled out by Burnham. and quite rightfully so. That ship has sailed and the Labour party, having won a massive majority does have a mandate. Although too early to say, it looks as if the British public are willing to give him a chance. Give someone a chance, who has some real conviction and policies that will benefit ordinary people, as opposed to demonizing immigrants, lining their own pockets and furthering the interests of the one percent. With Labour rising in the polls, Farage under investigation and his support nosediving, there is a new feeling of hope in the UK according to those living there.

17 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

Although too early to say, it looks as if the British public are willing to give him a chance.

If only there was a system in place where we could know for sure if people are willing to give him a chance. Oh wait, there is. It's called democracy. In the words of Andy burnham... General election now.

27 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

Give someone a chance, who has some real conviction and policies that will benefit ordinary people

Burnham has policies?

If so, I wonder why he kept them so quiet. Now the coup is complete surely he can find something more meaningful than cheaper single journey bus fares?

I wonder why he's so terrified to put those policies to the test and see if the electorate really support him in a General Election? I think they call it Democracy, or something.

Like a broken record. There was no coup and there will be no General Election. Get over it.

7 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Burnham has policies?

If so, I wonder why he kept them so quiet. Now the coup is complete surely he can find something more meaningful than cheaper single journey bus fares?

I wonder why he's so terrified to put those policies to the test and see if the electorate really support him in a General Election? I think they call it Democracy, or something.

Please read and digest: https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Labour-Party-manifesto-2024.pdf

The UK has Democracy, it is a General Election every 5 years currently, or whenever the leader of the winning Party calls for another General Election, not before.