Andy Burnham has insisted “names not numbers” will drive his mission to eradicate rough sleeping.
Hosting a summit on rough sleeping in Downing Street today, the Prime Minister insisted his plans to tackle homelessness across the country were “permanent”.
Article continues below
Addressing charities and local leaders, Mr Burnham said: “We had a mantra in Greater Manchester and today I’m making it the national mantra that underpins this collective drive.
“Names not numbers. That’s how you start to end homelessness. If you think about the name, the individual, the person right there in front of you – start there and then work from there. We know that everything is possible when government works on that principle. That’s what will guide us.”
It came as he announced a doubling in funding – to £874million – behind his pledge to offer every rough sleeper a bed this Christmas. According to the most recent figures, an estimated 4,793 people were sleeping rough on a single night in autumn 2025 in England.
One person who attended the six-hour long summit on Monday told The Mirror it was clear the issue “gets under [the Prime Minister’s] skin” and praised the political capital being spent on homelessness.
But they said the issue of the housing benefit freeze was “definitely raised” during the day by charities as the number one thing that could make a “massive difference” at the Budget.
Article continues belo
Local Housing Rates (LHR) set the amount of housing benefit private renters can receive but freezes have resulted in the benefit failing to keep up with the soaring costs of local rents. During his time as Greater Manchester Mayor, Mr Burnham said ending the freeze would make a real difference in preventing homelessness.
Earlier, the Prime Minister also visited homeless charity St Martin-in-the-fields in central London where he met with people experiencing homelessness and spoke to frontline workers about conditions on the street.
He also defended his record on tackling homelessness while mayor of Greater Manchester, saying figures “came right down” but the system faltered when people started travelling to the area to take advantage of the offer of a bed.
Appearing alongside Chancellor John Healey he suggested that his nationwide scheme will be more effective. Asked about the Conservatives’ criticism of his record, he told broadcasters: “They are wrong about that because I had a 10-year drive called a bed every night, and if people look at the figures, it came right down.
Article continues below
“The issue was we were the only area that was offering a bed every night, so obviously people travelled to Greater Manchester. It’s clear to me that it only works if everywhere does it.”
After Downing Street unveiled the extra cash to fund the mission to tackle rough sleeping, Lord John Bird, the founder of the Big Issue, said: “Andy Burnham is the first Prime Minister in the thirty-five-year history of the Big Issue to put ending rough sleeping at the very forefront of his plans.
Article continues below
“His record investment in his first 100 days has far outstripped his predecessors, and he should be commended for that. But throwing money at homelessness will never be enough on its own. Now comes the hard part — turning ambition into action, and making sure this action sustains and endures. As the nights draw in, it’s time to see if he can make good on his promise.”
Andy Burnham has insisted that a “names not numbers” approach must drive efforts to end rough sleeping, arguing that people living on the streets should be treated as individuals rather than statistics. The message places personal circumstances at the centre of the debate over homelessness, as local authorities and public services continue to face pressure to help people without secure accommodation.
Rough sleeping remains one of the most visible forms of homelessness in Britain. People sleeping in doorways, under bridges, in parks or in other public spaces often face difficult circumstances that cannot be solved simply by providing a temporary bed. Many need support with mental health, addiction, employment, family problems or access to long-term housing.
Burnham’s emphasis on “names not numbers” reflects the idea that effective homelessness services must understand each person’s situation. Behind every figure is an individual with a history, needs and challenges. Support workers must be able to identify those circumstances and provide help that gives people a realistic chance of moving away from the streets permanently.
The approach also highlights a wider problem facing public services. Governments and councils often measure performance through targets, totals and annual statistics. These figures are important for understanding the scale of a problem, but they do not always reveal whether an individual has found stable housing or remains trapped in a cycle of temporary accommodation and homelessness.
A person may disappear from one local count without having secured a permanent home. They may move to another area, enter temporary accommodation or find somewhere to sleep for a short period before returning to the streets. For that reason, measuring progress requires more than recording how many people are visible on a particular night.
A “names not numbers” philosophy seeks to make each person’s progress central to the work of local authorities and support organisations. Instead of treating homelessness as a general statistic, services would focus on identifying people, understanding their needs and coordinating practical assistance.
For Burnham, the message is particularly relevant to Greater Manchester, where homelessness has remained an important issue for local government and community organisations. Tackling rough sleeping requires cooperation between councils, housing providers, charities, health services and other agencies. No single organisation can resolve every difficulty faced by people living on the streets.
The challenge is to turn the principle into measurable action. Identifying someone by name is only the first step. Services must also have access to suitable accommodation, trained staff and the resources needed to support people over time.
For someone who has spent months or years sleeping rough, finding a place to stay may be a major breakthrough, but it does not necessarily end their difficulties. Maintaining a tenancy can require help with budgeting, benefits, healthcare, employment and rebuilding relationships. Without this support, people can find themselves homeless again.
This is why long-term housing is central to efforts to reduce rough sleeping. Emergency accommodation can provide immediate protection from the dangers of sleeping outdoors, particularly during cold weather. However, temporary beds cannot replace a stable home and the support required to keep it.
The “names not numbers” message also raises questions about how homelessness services should measure success. A council may report that fewer people are sleeping rough, but residents and campaigners will want to know whether those individuals have moved into secure accommodation. They may also ask how many people have returned to the streets and whether the services available are reaching those most in need.
Accurate information remains essential. Personalised support does not mean abandoning statistics. Instead, individual records and broader data can work together to provide a clearer picture of the problem. Local authorities need to understand both the number of people experiencing homelessness and the reasons why particular individuals struggle to leave it behind.
The causes of rough sleeping vary. Some people lose their homes after a relationship breaks down, while others experience financial hardship, unemployment or the loss of rented accommodation. Mental health difficulties and substance dependency can make it harder to maintain stable housing, although not everyone sleeping rough experiences these problems.
Some individuals also leave institutions without adequate housing arrangements or lack the family support that might otherwise help them through a crisis. Young people leaving care can be especially vulnerable if they do not have secure accommodation and reliable support networks.
These different circumstances mean that a single response will rarely work for everyone. One person may need immediate access to a housing placement, while another may require medical treatment, help with debt or assistance securing employment. Effective services must be flexible enough to respond to those differences.
Local authorities also face financial and practical constraints. Suitable housing can be difficult to secure, particularly where rents are high and affordable properties are limited. Support teams may be dealing with growing demand while trying to coordinate services across different organisations.
Even when emergency accommodation is available, some people may be reluctant to accept it. Previous experiences, safety concerns, rules within accommodation or difficulties associated with pets and personal belongings can influence whether someone feels able to use a particular service. Understanding these concerns is important if support is to reach those who are most vulnerable.
A personalised approach can help identify barriers that might otherwise be overlooked. A support worker who knows an individual’s circumstances may be better placed to develop a practical plan, arrange appointments and maintain contact when difficulties arise. Trust can take time to establish, especially for people who have experienced repeated setbacks.
Preventing homelessness is another essential part of the task. If people can receive assistance before losing their homes, councils may be able to prevent some cases of rough sleeping altogether. Early intervention can include advice for tenants facing eviction, help resolving housing disputes and support for people leaving hospitals, prisons or care settings.
Prevention also depends on the wider housing market. When affordable accommodation is scarce, even people with jobs can struggle to find somewhere suitable to live. Rising household costs and insecure employment can leave individuals with little financial room to cope with an unexpected expense.
This means that a mission to end rough sleeping cannot operate in isolation from housing and economic policy. Emergency services can respond to immediate needs, but lasting progress also requires sufficient affordable homes, effective homelessness prevention and reliable support for people at risk.
Public attitudes matter as well. Rough sleeping is often visible in busy town centres, shopping streets and transport areas, where people may encounter individuals asking for money or seeking shelter. These encounters can lead to concern about public spaces, but they should not obscure the fact that people sleeping rough face serious risks themselves.
People without secure accommodation can be exposed to extreme weather, violence, illness and exploitation. Access to sanitation, food and healthcare may be limited. The longer someone remains homeless, the more difficult it can become to address the problems that contributed to their situation.
A successful strategy therefore needs to combine compassion with practical organisation. Authorities must know who needs help, identify appropriate housing and ensure that support continues after someone leaves the street. Progress should be judged by whether people achieve lasting stability, not simply by whether they are no longer visible in a particular location.
Burnham’s emphasis on individuals rather than statistics offers a straightforward principle for this work. However, delivering meaningful change requires clear responsibilities, adequate resources and transparent reporting. Local leaders must be able to demonstrate what support is available, how quickly people can access it and whether those who receive help remain securely housed.
There is also a need for cooperation across local boundaries. People experiencing homelessness may move between towns and cities, particularly when searching for services or trying to reconnect with friends and family. Sharing appropriate information and coordinating support can help prevent individuals from falling between different systems.
Ultimately, the ambition to end rough sleeping will be judged by the experiences of the people affected. A reduction in official figures would be encouraging, but lasting success means more people moving into safe homes and being able to remain there.
Burnham’s “names not numbers” message highlights the human dimension of homelessness and the importance of understanding individual circumstances. The next challenge is ensuring that the principle is reflected in everyday services, from the first conversation with someone sleeping outdoors to the long-term support that helps them rebuild their life.
For people currently living on the streets, political statements alone will make little difference. What matters is access to a safe place to live, appropriate assistance and a realistic path towards stability. If local authorities can turn those priorities into consistent action, the approach could help make efforts against rough sleeping more focused on lasting outcomes rather than statistics alone.