When the press tells us we should be “reassured” by Andy Burnham’s economic team, we should be worried.
Bloomberg’s headline says it all:
Burnham’s Finance Friends Are a Reassuring Bunch
What follows in the article is an admission that Burnham has surrounded himself with the very architects of the system that he is seemingly rebelling against.
These are the men reassuring the bond markets: Jim O’Neill (Goldman Sachs), Andy Haldane (Bank of England), and Richard Hughes (the hedge fund man). That should tell us everything we need to know.
Bloomberg seemingly praises Andrew Haldane’s plans for “war bonds to boost defense spending”.
They call it “an issue whose non-resolution helped seal Starmer’s fate”.
Bloomberg presents Lord Jim O’Neill’s call for “boldness” as if it represents some kind of break from orthodoxy. But read what O’Neill actually said:
I’ve tried to encourage this government to be bolder. The part of the fiscal rule on borrowing to invest could be explored a lot more, and not in a way that freaks out the financial markets.
When O’Neill says he wants boldness “not in a way that freaks out the financial markets”, he is telling us that we can make small changes, but only if the people who actually hold power permit us. Bloomberg is, of course, cheering this on.
Burnham and business-friendly socialism
The Observer, meanwhile, is trying to sell Burnham’s “business-friendly socialism”. Written by William Hutton, the article calls for defence/war bonds to lift defence spending as well.
Andy Burnham’s credo of business-friendly socialism is winning backers
The former Manchester mayor is committed to a viable political and economic plan with the potential to transform Britain
@williamnhuttonhttps://t.co/HZ9bIEr1IR
— The Observer (@ObserverUK) June 21, 2026
Hutton has been a long advocate of these bonds and wants them to be exempt from inheritance tax.
Britain has to raise defence spending an extra £30bn by 2030. Defence bonds are the obvious answer. By making them inheritance tax exempt, a new market for bonds would be created and at such low coupons the savings would pay most of the foregone tax. A price worth paying . https://t.co/BtOAiYFPei
— Will Hutton (@williamnhutton) March 9, 2026
When Healey resigned as defence secretary because Starmer and Reeves rejected the military spending increases he wanted, Hutton sided with Healey.
He said:
…ideological opposition to defence bonds to raise vital resource has to be over-ridden. Starmer fails the test and loses his defence secretary.
By The Canary
