Will Andy Burnham commit to his Chancellor's unmet demand that govt must spend 3% of national income on defence, or risk the country's safety?

No. 10 North: New Evidence Raises Further Questions Further information has now emerged that raises an entirely new set of questions about the creation of No. 10 North. The most significant concerns the accommodation itself. It has now been suggested that No. 10 North is not occupying the existing office space used by GCHQ within Heron House, but a completely separate suite that had previously been available for commercial occupation. If that proves to be correct, the implications are considerably different from those first understood. A separate office suite is not simply opened by unlocking the door. Occupation would ordinarily require legal agreements, security assessments, secure communications, IT infrastructure, furniture, access control systems, branding, staffing and operational planning. Each of those stages creates an administrative trail. That naturally leads to a further question. When did that work actually begin? We also now know that Andy Burnham publicly announced his intention to establish No. 10 North on 29 June 2026, more than three weeks before entering Downing Street. There is nothing unusual about a political leader setting out proposals before taking office. The important distinction is between a political proposal and an authorised government project. At what point did officials receive instructions to begin preparing the premises? Who authorised those instructions? Which department accepted responsibility for implementing them? If the office required a new lease or occupation agreement, when was that negotiated? If secure communications had to be installed, when was that work commissioned? If furniture, branding, access systems and staffing had to be arranged, when were those decisions taken? These are not political questions. They are administrative questions, and each should have a documentary answer. Some responses to our original article have gone further, suggesting that the circumstances could amount to a breach of the Ministerial Code. We are not making that allegation. Whether the Ministerial Code is engaged depends upon facts that are not presently in the public domain. Until those facts are established, it would be wrong to draw that conclusion. However, the fact that such questions are now being asked demonstrates precisely why greater transparency is required. This investigation is no longer simply about a building in Manchester. It is about the machinery of government itself. If officials began preparing No. 10 North before 20 July, under whose authority did they do so? If they began only after 20 July, how was such a complex project delivered in just four days? Either explanation should be supported by documents. The Government could resolve these questions immediately by publishing the administrative chronology. Not political statements. Not carefully crafted press releases. The paperwork. The lease. The instructions. The approvals. The expenditure. The implementation timetable. Public confidence is strengthened by openness, not diminished by it. The documentary record exists. If the Government has nothing to hide, it should have nothing to fear from publishing it. Only then can the facts speak for themselves.

@andyburnham This is the interview you should’ve done *before* this charlatan was made PM via his rigged coronation. That you are only now questioning him about his proposed policies reinforces the legit accusation that he has no mandate. You lot spent more time focusing on a man+a cake.

@andyburnham Imagine bringing in as chancellor the guy that quit defence saying 3% was needed and not being able to answer this obvious question. Absolutely shockingly bad. Andrew is going to be an awful PM

No…as I said in @dailytelegraph: “I’m not persuaded by the naïve optimism of those that say John Healey will be generous to the Ministry of Defence having been promoted to Chancellor.    And nor do I expect that there is real substance to the hint from new Defence Secretary Wes Streeting that spending on Britain’s military will increase.   Instead, I expect that the identified investment gap will remain unfilled in real terms and that only the bare minimum will be spent to comply with the (detested) Trump-revised NATO contract.   Very creative accounting and snappy power-point charts will be used to show the UK hitting a (bogus) 3 per cent of GDP target at some time in the future.”

@andyburnham Or you could have said it’s nonsense isn’t it We need to invest in our people Keeping them safe through a fully functioning health service , job security , housing security Why is the defence narrative never challenged ?

@andyburnham He avoids eye contact every time he’s lying (which is all the time in a one on one interview like this)

@andyburnham What outrageous framing. The UK's safety isn't at risk at all.

@andyburnham Actually, Healey demanded more than committing to the 3% Healey said it wasn't enough and wanted an immediate guarantee & pathway to 3.5% from Starmer and Reeves. Streeting rejected the 3% on Defence, Burnham wouldn't commit to the 3% either

@andyburnham A simple YES is required, not some mealy mouthed fluff

@andyburnham He is totally winging it. Could not look her in the eye and give a straight answer.

@andyburnham I thought the BBC didn't do adverts or sponsored content? Maybe get them to fund you and leave the public out of whatever this is entirely?

@andyburnham Why are you not asking how this was all in place so quickly?

@andyburnham No questions from @bbclaurak about something that is up there at the top of most people’s worries, Illegal immigration or the boats. But lots of push on @realDonaldTrump the @bbc arch enemy. What a waste of time propaganda piece. No wonder no trusts the @BBCNews anymore.

@andyburnham Depends if his handlers tell him too. How did that Peter Mandelson interview come about?

@andyburnham Crikey could he talk any slower if he tried, or does he think it gives him some form of gravitas, in that he has something really important to say and we must listen to him 🥱

@andyburnham Who made *you* the arbiter of what is a risk to this country's safety? What if I asked you "did you buy those shoes because you liked them or was it because you just love saying 'fuck you' to people who couldn't possibly afford them?" - framing is entirely invalid

@andyburnham So misleading. Iran is spending less than 50% in £’s of what the UK has been spending for the last 20 years. Paying over the odds for tanks that don’t work or ships that need to be in the doc every other week is dead money. The soldiers aren’t getting the money, consultants are.

@andyburnham Dear Andy, please instruct Angela Rayner to return her £17,000 severance pay. John Healey, too, if he hasn’t paid it back. The rules on who gets it need changing, but the optics for the new govt are very poor.

@andyburnham There is zero requirement for the defence investment plan to be "fully funded". Honest economists know that all public spending is newly created @BankofEngland. Please do your homework @AndyBurnham @10DowningStreet @JohnHealey_MP

@andyburnham Laura, seen here on state-controlled media, in her role as sales rep for Lockheed Martin and Boeing, asking the latest actor to play 'Prime Minister' if the real leaders of the UK agree to transfer citizens wealth to US arms firms instead of spending it on healthcare for the poor

@andyburnham Should have parachuted @CamillaTominey in to do this interview.

@andyburnham No because there is no money available after we have given it away overseas and paid it out in welfare. It’s simple maths we give away more than we earn due to naive activist ideology and we are now so heavily in debt we can’t climb out of it. His only answer is tax, tax and tax

@andyburnham Newslflash. Britain is now a country our allies don't trust & openly mock over defence. We don't trust you either. Your lies are being exposed as I write this.

@andyburnham I'd a lot of RESPECT for @JohnHealey_MP when he was Sec. State for Defence & then resigning. However, how can he stay as Chancellor if the PM doesn't commit to 3% by 2030. He is demonstrating the biggest hypocrisy in this 'so called' Labour Government. @KemiBadenoch shame on him!

@andyburnham Why don’t ask him about his vanity project that you’re sat in. Which he’s milking the taxpayer for, without giving us a vote. It was bad optics anyway, now it looks corrupt.

@andyburnham

@andyburnham SKS has already done lots to heal relationships within NATO… pretty disingenuous to suggest otherwise…not surprising though 🤷🏻‍♂️

@andyburnham 'Brent of the North'...!! Get the guitar...

@andyburnham We want a General Election Laura. Did you ask him? Nobody is interested in anything else he has to say.

@andyburnham So no then.

@andyburnham Why did you NOT ask the Messiah how he plans to stop mass uncontrolled immigration, stop the boats & lower taxes, issues which deeply concern the British people. Shame on you. Sycophancy will get the legacy media (BBC,ITV, Sky news, CH4) no where.

@BBCPanorama @andyburnham Just talks in Erms and Ahs this fella. Christ alive

@andyburnham

@andyburnham That will be a no then. @UKLabour

@andyburnham Where did they get that ‘M&S in the 1960s’ flooring? So outdated