𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

Andy Burnham’s honeymoon with voters is already drawing to a close, as the new Prime Minister realises there are some problems you can’t solve without upsetting people.

That includes what to do with 200,000 people in the asylum system, either waiting for a decision on their application, or – the majority – appealing a decision that has already been made.

Of course, the real answer is to end the massive delays in the courts system and ensure that their claims are processed quickly, so that those denied asylum can be removed.

But in the meantime, they have to live somewhere. Council leaders, however, have long complained that some areas have high numbers while others are failing to house any.

As it happens, Manchester, where Mr Burnham used to be mayor, has taken in more than its fair share of asylum seekers in recent years.

Concentrating high numbers of asylum seekers in a few places tends to upset local residents. So Mr Burnham wants to ensure they are dispersed more evenly across the country, and perhaps he has a point.

But when he set out his plan in an interview this week, it sparked an immediate backlash. Residents in areas that have been spared asylum seekers so far aren’t keen on their local hotels or housing stock being taken over, and you can understand that too.

Then there’s the issue of social care. Everyone agrees the current system is broken. People who develop long term conditions in later life face massive bills which they, or their children, often have to pay by selling the family home.

It’s a lottery. But sharing the cost more fairly can only mean the government spreading the burden, probably through some form of tax.

The PM is already facing criticism over a potential “death tax”.

And his plan to devolve power to regions outside of London is also encountering opposition.

Mr Burnham believes that doing this properly must involve letting the English regions raise their own funding somehow. The alternative is to make them beg Whitehall for money – which is what happens now – so that real power still lies in London.

But it’s raised concerns among local council leaders that all the cash will go to regional mayors. In addition, it sounds a lot like hard-pressed voters will end up paying more tax than they do now.

These are just a few examples of the problems the new Prime Minister faces.

This Labour Government has managed to create many problems, for example by inflicting a host of extra costs onto employers just as global events (and the continuing impact of the Covid pandemic) created a jobs crisis for young people.

But there are a few big issues that genuinely can’t be tackled without hard choices.

This is why speculation that Mr Burnham may hold an early election refuses to die down.

Early, in this case, could mean in the first half of 2027 rather than in the next few weeks, but certainly sooner than required.

Many polls show Labour is now the most popular party. This is the so-called Burnham bounce. But it could prove temporary – even if Mr Burnham does a half-decent job.

It’s just the nature of government that you do things that make you unpopular, especially if the country was in a dire state when you arrived in Number 10.

The surgery may be necessary, but it still hurts. And Andy Burnham’s best hope may be to hold an election before the pain gets too great.