The prime minister faced questions about his approach after the Treasury disputed that Chancellor John Healey had suggested to the that the benefits bill will be cut before the next election, which must be held by August 2029.
When Healey was asked by the Today Programme on Radio 4 whether there would be a cut in the bill before polling day, he said: “There will be, there will be a reduction in the benefits bill, we’ll do that in a Labour way.”
But several Treasury sources took issue with this being interpreted as a promise to do so by the next election. Downing Street later said it was “not setting an arbitrary target or timetable”.
The prime minister’s official spokesman would not say whether the government’s ambition to cut welfare spending meant reducing it below its current level, or ensuring that future spending rises at a slower rate than is currently projected.
Further details about the government’s proposals are expected after two major reports are published in November.
These include a review of disability benefits co-chaired by Labour minister Sir Stephen Timms and one on young people not in education, employment or training (Neet) led by former minister Alan Milburn.
The two reviews were announced by former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer after his attempt to make significant changes to the welfare system, including restricting eligibility for some health-related benefits, resulted in a mass revolt of Labour MPs and an embarrassing climbdown in June 2025.
Speaking during a visit to Derby, Burnham said the “big next priority in front of us” is the publication of the Milburn report.
He said: “We just want to get stuck into supporting people to help people off benefits and into work. There’s no delay there. We want that to happen as quickly as possible.”
Pressed again for a timeline on his plans, the prime minister said: “We’re working hard to cut the welfare bill as soon as we possibly can. But we’re doing it in a way that supports people into work.
“If we just went and made crude cuts, in the end, that leaves people in crisis, and you spend more public money somewhere else, so it’s about getting people into sustainable employment.”