SPEAKER_00

This is a City AM Studios production.

SPEAKER_07

Hello and welcome back to Business as Usual with me, Martin Kimber. And me, Matt Kenyon. Coming up on the podcast, Andy Burnham has a new job.

SPEAKER_05

In the 1980s, Britain took some wrong turns. Political power was centralized. Economic power privatised. Large parts of the country deindustrialized.

SPEAKER_07

We'll look at what lies ahead in Prime Minister Burnham's first 100 days. In with the new, out with the old, Sir Kirstama bids farewell to the nation.

SPEAKER_03

I go with good grace, I go with a smile, and I go proud of everything that we have achieved. Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_07

What is Starmer's legacy if he has one at all? Plus, how good a communicator really is the new Prime Minister? Well, welcome back. It is Andy Bernon's first full day as Prime Minister. We're going to be bringing you reaction from the city, from business, and of course, we'll be talking about the politics of it all as well.

SPEAKER_06

I bet he had some uh Sunday scaries on.

SPEAKER_07

I would. I'd be so nervous. Especially if I'd wanted it for 20 years and tried to go for it twice before.

SPEAKER_06

What if I'm crap at it? Um but first let's recap what happened on Monday as the former Manchester Mayor took over the reins from Sakir Starmer following the outgoing Prime Minister's final goodbye outside Downing Street.

SPEAKER_03

I am confident that Britain is now stronger and fairer than it was two years ago. Our economy is stronger, our public services are on the up with the biggest fall in waiting times for 17 years. Children are being lifted out of poverty every single day. Immigration is down significantly. Our defence and security are on a far stronger footing, and our international reputation is greatly enhanced.

SPEAKER_07

And back outside Downing Street, but this time without Alexin, the new PM, Burnham, promised to lay out a 10-year plan for Britain. But we're not going to hear about it just quite yet.

SPEAKER_05

Later this year, I will bring forward a new plan for Britain, a 10-year plan. Laying out a path from where we are now to where I believe we all want Britain to be, wherever we're coming from, whatever party we support.

SPEAKER_07

It was quite a brief speech, but with some big promises. But he did make one big central policy pledge.

SPEAKER_05

I will soon go through that door behind me and issue my first instruction to end rough sleeping in our country.

SPEAKER_06

I think I saw them pack it in the back of that Audi that he left in, like trying to cram it into the backseat.

SPEAKER_07

It was funny because for a while every PM had their own distinctive lecturer, and like Liz Truss had the twisty geometric one, but perhaps the most abstract shape you can have is no lectur at all. So that was Burnham's big win. Um Simon, he talked for not very long, only for a few minutes, and it was probably less substantial than we expected. But there were some interesting bits. What did you make of the speech?

SPEAKER_04

Yeah, I mean, it was a very um brief speech. I think it was immediately obvious that Burnham has a bit more charisma, a bit more uh, you know, he's able to have more of a repartee with the public in a way that Starmer could never.

SPEAKER_00

Woof.

SPEAKER_04

Um But I yeah, there was very little in the way of detail, but some pretty bold uh visions that he has um for his his time in office. Uh he says he wants to make this moment a circuit breaker for Britain, bringing forward the biggest changes in 40 years with a new political model and a new economic model. So this is not, you know, we'll we'll change a bit here, we'll we'll tinker around with this. This is he wants to to rewrite the uh economics of the UK. I don't know how you do that, but because it's what he wants to do.

SPEAKER_06

With a 10-year plan, no less.

SPEAKER_07

I love this narrative he has of like the coups stop now, the German stops now again. No more new prime ministers. That last palace coup will be the that'll be the final one we do.

SPEAKER_04

Yeah. And I I suppose it's um it's interesting that he says that because obviously he doesn't he've seen the rate at which prime ministers have been replaced the last few years and doesn't want to be the next one. But at the same time, there is talk and sort of chatter in in Westminster about whether he is he's gearing Labour up for a 2027 election uh because he's seen the pace with which the honeymoon uh phase of a prime minister's time in office evaporates. That's normally sort of within 12 months, so he needs to get his act together pretty quickly if he wants to survive in January. Yeah, about 12 days for Star Wars.

SPEAKER_06

But I mean, we after the uh speech, everyone kind of looked around at each other in the newsroom being like, Well, what was that? Um but there was one substantive point in which he's already managed to spend money within the sort of four minutes he was speaking.

SPEAKER_04

Yes, so he I mean he has said that he wants to set up some kind of 10-year plan later in the year. We don't know really any of the details of that at all at this stage, but we do know about his first actual policy announcement as prime minister, and that is to end rough sleeping. Um that's quite an interesting um one to go with because uh A, it's uh not an easy task. I mean, plenty of uh governments in the past have had various different commitments to ending homelessness. Rishly Sunak had a go. Uh it's clearly not worked. Uh, and B, it's not a particularly cheap policy either. Uh so the Sunak, um when Sunak was in in number 11, he committed something in the order of 750 million pounds a year uh to end uh rough sleeping. That was partly by uh housing tens of thousands of people uh during the pandemic. Um and so you know that adjusted for inflation would be closer to something like a billion pounds a year um now. And it and you know, it's it's a policy that you can't, you know, it's not a one-and-done policy where you spend this money and and thereby end all homelessness forever. No, it's something that literally would would would take years of continued uh investment. And maybe this is another thing where actually, because it would take so long to deliver, there's no expectation that uh it can be delivered ahead of the next general election. And so there's no actual metric by which to judge it.

SPEAKER_06

But like a billion a year doesn't actually it sounds like a lot, but when you compare that to the 20 plus billion they were going to spend on carbon capture, when you compare that to what was briefed over the weekend about foreign aid, and in comparison with a lot of other states, but anyway, you compare it with the pension and the triple lock, we don't want to anger the boomers that that listen, but like you know, in comparison with that, a billion ain't that much.

SPEAKER_04

So yes, you do. Well that I mean that's certainly true, but without wishing to sound heartless, on a sort of per capita basis, it is a it is really a lot of money. I mean, if you look at the the number of people that were um that were found accommodation that the government found accommodation for uh during the pandemic versus the spend, we're talking about something like twenty to thirty thousand a year per person. So this is quite an expensive policy when you weigh it up in in those terms.

SPEAKER_07

It's also worth saying that Manchester, which was always held up as a panacea and and very much the reason why Burnham is in, because it represents his record, is not a panacea for ending rough sleeping, where it's still very much a problem there and a problem which has been rising.

SPEAKER_04

And do you know which which uh uh local authority has the highest level of rough sleeping? Westminster. So it will it should be on Burnham's doorstep that this will be a visible problem if he if he doesn't deal with it in the way he's promised to.

SPEAKER_07

Another thing I just want to pull up, because I mean we're focusing on the rough sleeping aspect because it was really the one specific thing he brought up. But there is now talk of this 10-year plan for Britain later on in the year. That could be, I suppose, just before September, that could be in late November, that could represent the budget. Probably pre-budget, right? You mean you think you think it'd be tied in tied into the budget. Um I suppose how long can Burnham leave it without saying something more substantial? I'm quite surprised that he hasn't already.

SPEAKER_06

What is it going to mean for inward investment and you know business decisions being put off until this plan is sort of set set out?

SPEAKER_04

You know, I think there's also maybe in it there's a there's a desire to slightly rewrite the the fiscal framework somewhat because a lot of the time uh budgets are based on a sort of five-year time horizon. So if he immediately starts talking about a 10-year model, he can push out uh those um debt uh requirements or spending requirements uh over a longer horizon to try and spread them out more evenly, I guess. I don't know. That's that's one thing.

SPEAKER_07

Just one more question for you, Simon, just before we leave uh it because we're running out of time a bit. Uh are you a problem solver or a point scorer?

SPEAKER_04

Uh I'm very much I think you can solve the problem by scoring points.

SPEAKER_07

That's uh That's what Spain did. Yeah, well indeed. Simon, that's all we have time for, but there'll be lots more to talk about as the week goes on. Thank you very much for joining us.

SPEAKER_04

Thank you.

SPEAKER_06

Thank you very much, Simon. Now, just time for some other stories, making the business headlines uh that may have gotten a little lost in the political hullabaloo. Self-storage operator Yellow has continued to trim its headcount and hike investment into automation in a bid to cut staff costs. That's as the company continues to deal with the fallout of Rachel Reeves's decision to hike business rates and the minimum wage in the 2024 budget.

SPEAKER_07

Meanwhile, shares in healthcare services firm Craneware tumbled in early trading on Monday as it revealed that it's been hit by a cyber attack. The aim-listed business said that early investigations suggest a significant volume of file names were viewed and exfiltrated, which is a great verb.

SPEAKER_06

It is, it is. And Ryanair has seen its profit drop by more than a third as rising jet fuel prices triggered by the war in Iran begin to take effect. The airline saw its operating costs jump 11% due to fuel rising to $150 a barrel.

SPEAKER_07

Right, so coming up after the break, what does a new Andy Burnham premiership mean for public utilities such as water? And what does it mean more broadly for our political landscape? Don't go anywhere.

SPEAKER_06

Now, in his maiden speech, our Prime Minister Andy Burnham talked about taking back industries into much greater public control. That comes, of course, against the backdrop of stakeholders in Thames Water battling to keep the company out of government hands. Joining us for the latest is CTAM's deputy editor, Charlie Conchi. Welcome back. Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_02

Good to be here. What is the latest on this ongoing saga? This really is an ongoing saga. Just to, I suppose, recap a bit. It's been several years of crisis, really, for Thames Water. It's been struggling under this nearly £20 billion debt pile, really trying to fend off nationalisation. The reporting and the suggestion from government has always been that there is the threat there of this special administration regime and means of kind of taking Thames Water into temporary public control. We had Thames Water accounts last week as well, but they revealed that there was just enough cash to last until the end of this year. So it's all coming together at a time when Andy Burnham's obviously coming into power, and it is gonna be one of his first real challenges to tackle as Prime Minister. He's been quite vague and sort of conflicting on his stance on Thames Water in some ways. He did previously say it should be nationalised in an interview with The Guardian. He then has used the kind of softer language of greater public control and deliberately almost holding back that word of nationalization. A couple of big developments over the weekend, though. There was this um reporting that suggested that Burnham was preparing to take the Thames into the special administration regime, a temporary form of nationalisation. We've also had a sort of update from the other um party in this, which is the creditors to Thames Water. They've been putting forward a plan to try and take over uh Thames Water, keep it within private hands. They committed to invest billions of pounds in sort of replenishing the infrastructure. They did offer some leniency on the fines that Thames Water has faced for things like pollution and sewage spills that now doesn't look to be going forward. It looks like nationalisation is essentially the favoured option for the Burnham government. We're just waiting now on some details, and there were perhaps a few allusions to it in the speech today, talking of taking life essentials into greater public control. So we're still waiting for some of the uh the details to be fleshed out there, but it does look to be heading in that direction.

SPEAKER_06

Which uh uh the chief executive Chris Weston at Thames Water might say is a little unfair given that a lot of the figures for the Thames Water are kind of going in the right direction, like fewer sewage spills and you know, greater greater infrastructure improvements and stuff like that. Like it is, you know, he's been given a tough job by Chris Weston.

SPEAKER_02

I don't think anyone envies him that. No, no.

SPEAKER_06

And and he earns considerably less than a lot of other water bosses do, other sort of companies. Um but at the same time, Andy Burnham might think, well, if I nationalise this one, that'll kind of scare the others into kind of doing a better job.

SPEAKER_02

That is potentially one way of reading it. I think the the interesting point here, and the really sort of hard numerical point, is just the cost that this is going to inflict on the taxpayer as well. So this is not an easy job of nationalising a company and keeping it going. Um I mean, some reports have suggested there was a report done a couple of years ago by Taneo, the administration firm, which had handled the Bulb administration, which was a similar special administration regime. They estimated using that as a kind of guide that the cost of 18 months in the special administration regime could cost a taxpayer up to 4 billion, just around the £4 billion mark. Um there's obviously knock-ons as well. Suppliers will charge more to a company in special administration, lenders may charge more punitive interest rates to borrow money as well. So this is going to saddle the taxpayer ultimately with a huge amount of cost if this does move ahead. And there is now this other option on the table. They've been willing to bend slightly and say they are willing to maybe offer a sort of golden share to government, offer some sort of split private-public ownership model. I mean, we revealed over the weekend that these neither neither party, either Thames, the creditors, and Burnham's camp had actually sat down to talk yet. So there were no ongoing negotiations. Thames are in the dark, the creditors are in the dark, the only people who seem to know are those around Burnham, and they're holding their cards fairly close to their chests at the moment.

SPEAKER_07

It's a tricky political look as well, because just as they open number 10 north and pledge to end this, what Burnham would describe as a great South bias in our politics, one of the first acts the government might have to do is plow four million pounds a year into a southern utility.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah, it's it's again, it just points to how naughty this horrible political challenge is waiting for Burnham. Um, it's there's obviously the the point on this north-south divide, but ultimately this is part of Burnham's greater public control of utilities agenda, which he, whilst changing the language slightly, has been quite clear in his desire to take these kind of companies slightly closer to government. So, yes, the north-south divide angle is maybe one way of looking at it. I think this greater public control of utilities could be another as well.

SPEAKER_06

Charlie Conchy, City AM's Aquaman, our own Jason Lamoer. Thank you very much for coming in. Thank you for having me.

SPEAKER_07

And finally, it's always a big set piece moment when a new Prime Minister addresses the nation for the very first time. And it is a moment which is very slightly less momentous these days because it seems to happen every other year. But how will Burnham's debut to the nation be remembered? Well, our opinion editor, Alice Denby, has some thoughts. Alice, welcome.

SPEAKER_01

Hello. I mean, look, you're right that we've been through this all before. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be slightly outraged that we're getting a new Prime Minister with a very different agenda, promising huge sweeping changes for which no one has voted. Okay, so let's not forget he has absolutely no mandate for this. As for what that agenda represents, Oasis say don't look back in anger. But to me, this whole agenda is just a hackneyed, na uh 80s socialist talking point about unwinding 40 years of neoliberalism. It's completely backward looking. Uh, Andy Burnham played a huge part in those 40 years of neoliberalism. He was in the cabinet for three of them, Labour in charge for 15. All he seems to want to do is to take us back to the 1970s, renationalise industry, regulate tax, uh, massively expand the state. And I think he just doesn't understand basic economics. He says that it's only by taking public control of life's essentials that you can drive down their cost. That's not what drives prices down. What drives prices down is competition.

SPEAKER_07

I think something quite unnerving about some of the surprise around what he's saying because there wasn't that much briefing to the press, but there also wasn't very much of a preview of what he was going to say because there was no leadership election. So we're it feels like we're having the very opening stages of the Labour leadership election in front of Downing Street as he prepares to go in and implement a massive new agenda. Do you think he's going to be able to keep public opinion on side as he does this? Because people only went to the polls, as you said, a couple of years ago. This could be quite different. But what's he gonna have to do to get this through and keep himself at relatively stable levels of popularity?

SPEAKER_01

Look, to be honest, I think this is gonna be the high point of his popularity. Um I think he's gonna get in there and gonna realise that he has very little fiscal room for manoeuvre. Um he's what's he gonna do to make people immediately, right now, tomorrow, feel better off that doesn't actually harm the economy in some way. Um but look, look, I will say this for him is that I think we saw with Sears Starmer and Rachel Reeves that coming in with a very doomy, gloomy narrative and talking down the economy and saying how hard everything is gonna be can actively harm the economy. So his kind of sunnier, chirpier, more social media friendly uh vibe is in itself a good thing. Um I just don't know how long it will survive contact with reality.

SPEAKER_06

I actually was thinking of pitching you an opinion piece because I don't know what the word neoliberal means. It seems to mean a million different things to a million different people. I've never met anyone in the city who calls themselves a neoliberal, uh, you know, someone who's pro-market, someone who's pro-free market. You don't say, hi, I'm Martin, I'm a I'm a neoliberal.

SPEAKER_01

No.

SPEAKER_06

Um, it just seems to be a pejorative word used by people on the left. Um, do we think he is now anti Tony Blair's globalist free marketer neoliberalism, or is he anti-sort of Donald Trump's authoritarian, more authoritarian, inward-looking, uh tariffy kind of neoliberalism? You know, do we know what his what his objection actually is?

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I mean I agree with you. I make this point in the the leader I've just written that neoliberalism is a term that's meaningless to anybody who actually supports free markets and it's used only by critics to vaguely mean that Thatcher was bad. Um I honestly think that this is just a sort of Labour Party narrative that only pleases a certain base, um, especially in the North where it experienced rapid deindustrialization under Thatcher. Um but the but the point is, I mean, even if you if you look at Manchester and the undeniable success and growth of that city, it is basically down to what he would call neoliberalism. It's crowding in private investment and it's also moving away from industrial jobs towards service-led jobs. Um and that's now what he's saying he wants to undo. He wants to undo his own progress.

SPEAKER_06

Well, I mean, we will see how it how it pans out for him. But uh, if only because we're running out of space on our podcast hosting platform and we need to keep the episodes tight this week. Thank you very much for coming in, Alice.

SPEAKER_01

Absolute pleasure, as always.

SPEAKER_06

Thank you, Alice. Well, that's just about all we have time for today. Thank you very much for listening to Business as Usual.

SPEAKER_07

As ever, don't forget to subscribe to City AM's daily and weekly newsletters, and of course, don't forget to download our free app.

SPEAKER_06

And don't forget to vote in the Toast Awards 2026 for your favourite hospitality venue in the Square Mile. We'll be back in your podcast feeds tomorrow at 6am, in unless podcasts have been taxed or something by then. Uh, but for now, goodbye. Goodbye.