Burnham's Cabinet: Neoliberalism End or Empty Promise? 2026

Andy Burnham has promised to bring “four decades of neoliberalism” to an end, but his cabinet choices raise serious questions about whether that pledge will be honoured. The first test of his commitment was always going to be the team he appointed, and the red flags are impossible to ignore. Ending neoliberalism would mean putting privatised services back into public hands, unleashing public investment and using the power of the state to reshape the economy.

Yet Burnham’s support for the government’s suffocating fiscal rules – and his preference for the vaguer language of “public control” over public ownership – had already raised doubts. Had he truly meant it, Ed Miliband would have been the obvious choice for chancellor. The former Labour leader has been on a political journey since concluding that his defeat in the 2015 general election was partly the consequence of insufficient radicalism.

Why Miliband Should Have Been Chancellor

As energy secretary, Miliband was the one cabinet minister who combined dynamism with a genuine determination to challenge the status quo. His record included the establishment of the publicly owned Great British Energy, the return of energy-system planning to public hands and an interventionist industrial policy. He would also have been prepared to confront Treasury resistance to transformative economic policies.

This is, after all, a government bureaucracy with much to answer for in Britain’s long economic decline. Its record stretches back to the 1970s, when excessively pessimistic projections of the country’s borrowing requirements helped precipitate the notorious International Monetary Fund bailout and the avoidable public sector cuts that followed.

The Campaign Against Miliband

Burnham seems to have folded in the face of a loud and very public campaign against Miliband’s appointment, centred on warnings of an impending backlash from the markets. Some of Burnham’s allies briefed against Miliband on the grounds of his support for net zero policies – a move that suggests a clash between radical ambitions and market orthodoxy.

Comparison: Burnham's Promises vs. Reality

The following table highlights the gap between Burnham’s stated goals and his actual cabinet appointments.

Key Takeaways

• Andy Burnham’s cabinet signals a retreat from radical economic reform, despite his anti-neoliberal rhetoric.
• Ed Miliband’s omission as chancellor suggests market pressures outweigh transformative policies.
• The Treasury’s historical role in Britain’s economic decline remains unchallenged.
• Public ownership and investment plans risk being watered down into “public control” buzzwords.

Burnham’s decision to sideline Miliband is not just a personnel choice – it is a strategic statement about the direction of his government. By prioritising market reassurance over bold structural change, he risks repeating the mistakes of previous Labour governments that promised radicalism but delivered continuity.

The neoliberal era may not end with this cabinet. Instead, we may see a continuation of austerity-lite policies dressed in progressive language. The real test will come when Burnham’s fiscal rules collide with the need for public investment – and whether he has the courage to break with orthodoxy.

FAQ