Rough sleepers in Manchester city centre just days after Christmas last year (Image: Manchester Evening News)
Andy Burnham’s £874million vow to end rough sleeping by Christmas has been branded “nonsense” after a Manchester councillor said the Prime Minister left her city still battling a homelessness crisis. On Monday, Labour vowed to double the funding to tackle homelessness in England after the PM promised to give every rough sleeper a route off the streets by Christmas 2026.
But he made a similar vow in 2017 when mayor of Greater Manchester. Even though the number of rough sleepers a night fell from 268 to 90, that figure has now doubled to 197. Meanwhile, 9,589 people are sofa-surfing or in emergency accommodation. In July, Manchester rough sleepers told the Express there were not enough hostels, with Glaswegian Joseph McDowell, 63, bemoaning: “At night I sleep where I can. It’s dangerous. People p*** on you.”
Joseph McDowell, 63, had struggled on the streets for months (Image: Reach PLC)
Now Reform UK’s Sian Astley, who came second with more than 111,000 votes in the race to replace Mr Burnham as mayor, says the idea of sorting the issue nationally in just the few weeks before Christmas is “ridiculous” and “nonsense”. The Manchester city councillor, who represents Baguley, has visited the city’s rough sleepers and hostels but says getting them off the streets is sadly incredibly “complex”.
Ms Astley said: “I’m seeing with my own eyes the reality of the situation in Manchester and – excuse my French – the whole thing’s an absolute s***show. It’s a nonsense for Burnham to say that his policy on homelessness, whether that’s rough sleepers or whether that’s people in temporary accommodation, has been successful in Manchester.
“But I understand why he wants to spend £800million across England, because at the minute he’s been trumpeting about Manchester and about how brilliant Manchester is. I just think the whole thing is ridiculous.
“What really upsets a lot of them is they know they’ve got complex problems and they want to be helped. But people coming to the city such as migrants, who may not have drug problems or been repeatedly homeless in Manchester for 15 years, get helped because they’re seen as ‘easier to help’.”
Reform UK’s Sian Astley thinks Andy Burnham’s target is ‘nonsense’ (Image: Sean Hansford/Manchester Evening News)
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Ms Astley also suggested that some people flock to Manchester, from abroad and within the UK, because they believe the hype of it being a “City of Sanctuary” that supposedly leads the way in tackling the issue.
She added: “People head to Manchester – you see that. People sitting on the desk at the town hall (see) people turning up with a suitcase, saying ‘we believe we can have a bed for a night’, or ‘we believe anybody in Manchester gets housed’.
“When I was doing some of the electoral paperwork, I was actually in the town hall reception, and a guy just walked in with a suitcase from Morecambe. He said he lost his accommodation in Lancashire and he’d come to Manchester, and could he have a flat?
“The staff dealt with it absolutely brilliantly, and he was quite amenable – they stressed that he returned to Lancashire. They weren’t being rude, just very practical.
I said to them, ‘how often does it happen?’ And they’re like ‘every day’. It has created massive problems because you get some into temporary accommodation, but more people keep pouring into the funnel.”
As a builder who previously starred on BBC One’s DIY SOS and the BBC Two series Your Home Made Perfect before going into politics, Ms Astley said not enough new social housing is being built for the homeless. She added: “There’s no housing. As a councillor, you get casework, and some emails – from people who are absolutely desperate – I just think, ‘I can’t help you’.
“There was a guy a few weeks ago who found himself homeless after a split-up. I helped him register as homeless on the housing, and it says ‘you will be contacted within three days’. It’s about a month ago, and nobody’s even got in touch with him. So, he’s living on his brother’s garage floor.
“Bev Craig, the new Mayor of Greater Manchester, understands the problems and is very switched on, but what’s she going to do about it? I don’t know.
“I look at mass immigration, the fact that Manchester is a sanctuary city. You cannot just keep pouring people into a city where there are 20,000 people on the housing register and 200 a night sleeping rough, 10,000 people registered homeless with half of them kids.”
A homeless person waking up on Christmas Day in Manchester (Image: Jason Roberts/Manchester Evening News)
Shadow Housing Secretary Katie Lam said rough sleeping had hit “record highs under Labour” and criticised Mr Burnham for failing to end rough sleeping when he was running the North-west of England region. Across England, recent official figures estimate there were 4,793 people sleeping rough on a single night in autumn 2025.
Homelessness organisations pointed to a lack of social housing, placing a strain on efforts to cut rough sleeping. When Greater Manchester mayor in 2018, Mr Burnham set up “a bed every night” scheme to offer emergency accommodation to those on the streets. It now provides more than 600 bed spaces, assigning teams to help rough sleepers find permanent housing, addiction support and other types of care.
It led to a drop in the number of rough sleepers in Greater Manchester from 268 in 2017, to 90 in 2021. But the figure has risen each year since then. Paul Dennett, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority’s lead for Housing First, blamed “austerity, welfare cuts, and the chronic undersupply of social housing” as major factors.
Professor Beth Watts-Cobbe, of Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, said while numbers had gone up, Greater Manchester still compares “really favourably to the national picture”. Asked about his previous attempts to end rough sleeping in Manchester, Mr Burnham accepted that people were coming to the city to seek a roof over their head.
He said: “I bring the learning from that to this. The reason why the figures went back up is because we were the only place that was offering a bed every night, so people came to Greater Manchester knowing that we were providing a higher level of support … I realised that it’s only if everywhere does it at the same level that you can actually end rough sleeping.”
Andy Burnham hosting a rough sleeping summit in Downing Street on Monday (Image: Carlos Jasso/AFP)
Ex-pro basketballer Jerelle “Jefe” Okoro, 35, has been helping feed the homeless across Greater Manchester with his Jefe’s Ramen pop-ups – where he encourages people to buy one ramen dish and donate another to feed rough sleepers. Having been homeless himself, the kind-hearted volunteer knows the struggle of finding a hot meal and has been urging local pubs and charities to get on board and grow his initiative.
His most recent night sold more than 50 bowls of ramen – meaning 50 meals for the homeless – and lifted footfall at the pub where he did the pop-up by 40%, thereby boosting their takings too.
Jefe, a former professional basketball player for Leicester Riders, told the Express: “I think Mr Burnham is doing his best trying to highlight the issues. A lot of people think this is a battle that he is using to champion his position and make him look more relatable. He has been trying to put the focus on how some of these numbers are.
“Unfortunately, it’s a problem that we have to work together to fix. If the problem isn’t acknowledged, then it doesn’t exist. If it doesn’t exist, it can’t be attacked.
“I think the shift will happen when the UK realise that a lot of issues will only change when we, as the people, stand and choose to make a difference ourselves. I hope Jefe’s Ramen is a catalyst for more people understanding that we need to work together to fix this and there are solutions if we work together.”
Jefe Okoro is trying to help the homeless (Image: Jefe Okoro)
Homeless Michelle Benjamin told Burnham to ‘open his eyes’ (Image: Reach plc)
Jefe’s Ramen is a community interest company (CIC), meaning it is run in the interest of benefitting the community, not to generate profits.
He added: “I’ve been on the other side of this. I can’t ignore what I saw and experienced. Every city has a pub with a quiet night and a kitchen doing nothing, and every city has people with nowhere to sleep.”
In July, homeless mother-of-three Michelle Benjamin, 34, told the Express she had been living on the streets of Manchester since December, having previously worked in sales and cafes. She said then that Mr Burnham needed to “open his eyes” to the reality of homelessness in his own city before thinking he could solve it for the rest of England.
To support Jefe in feeding more homeless, donate at https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/
Andy Burnham’s Vow to End Rough Sleeping in England by Christmas Exposed as ‘Nonsense’
Prime Minister Andy Burnham is facing renewed scrutiny over his promise to get people sleeping rough off England’s streets by Christmas, after acknowledging that some people will still be homeless when the festive deadline arrives.
The pledge was presented as a major test of the Government’s determination to tackle one of the country’s most visible social problems. Burnham promised that everyone sleeping rough would be offered a route off the streets before Christmas, backed by hundreds of millions of pounds in public funding.
But the distinction between offering someone help and actually ending rough sleeping has become central to the debate. In an interview published by The Big Issue on October 26, Burnham admitted that people would still be sleeping rough after Christmas and acknowledged that this would represent a failure to some degree. He explained that not everyone offered accommodation would accept it. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search2″,”turn544723search10”]} />
The admission has provided ammunition for critics who question whether the original pledge was too ambitious or presented in a way that could create unrealistic expectations.
Yet the Prime Minister has not abandoned the programme. Instead, he has stressed that the Government can guarantee an offer of assistance more readily than it can guarantee that every individual will accept that offer or remain permanently housed.
The argument now centres on what success should mean: a commitment to offer every rough sleeper a route indoors, or a promise that nobody will be sleeping on the streets when Christmas arrives.
What Burnham actually promised
When Burnham launched his national drive in August 2026, the Government said everyone sleeping rough who needed help would be offered a route off the streets by Christmas.
The initial programme was backed by £442 million, combining support for accommodation with funding for health services, addiction treatment and other forms of assistance. The intention was not simply to provide emergency beds during cold weather, but to help people move towards more stable living arrangements. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search1″,”turn544723search5”]} />
The plan was also designed to bring councils, charities, housing providers and local organisations into a coordinated national effort. The Government argued that isolated local initiatives could struggle if neighbouring areas did not provide similar support, potentially encouraging people to move towards places where accommodation was more readily available.
Burnham drew comparisons with the emergency accommodation programme introduced during the Covid-19 pandemic, when authorities worked to bring many people sleeping rough indoors.
However, replicating that approach on a lasting basis presents different challenges. Emergency accommodation can provide immediate safety, but ending homelessness requires suitable housing, ongoing support and measures to prevent people from returning to the streets.
The Government’s Christmas commitment was therefore intended to establish a national offer of help, rather than guarantee that every case of rough sleeping would disappear permanently by a specific date.
That distinction was present in the programme’s stated aims, but the headline promise to get everyone off the streets inevitably created expectations that the Government would be judged against as the deadline approached.
The admission that changed the debate
Burnham’s recent interview made the limits of the commitment more explicit.
Asked how he would feel if people were still sleeping rough after Christmas, he acknowledged that the Government would have fallen short to some degree. However, he also rejected the suggestion that he could guarantee nobody would be sleeping outside.
He explained that some people might not trust the authorities enough to accept an offer of accommodation, while others might have circumstances that made the transition indoors more complicated.
This is a significant qualification because rough sleeping is not always resolved by providing a bed for one night. People may need help with mental health difficulties, substance dependency, family breakdown, financial problems or other issues that make maintaining accommodation difficult.
Some may also have experienced repeated failures in the housing system and be reluctant to engage with services. Building trust can take time, especially when someone has spent a long period living without a secure home.
Burnham’s position is that councils should make an offer of appropriate assistance to everyone identified as sleeping rough. But the result will depend partly on whether people accept that assistance and whether the accommodation and support available meet their needs. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search2″,”turn544723search3”]} />
Critics may regard this as a retreat from the original ambition. Supporters may argue that acknowledging the practical difficulties is more realistic than promising an outcome no government can fully control.
Either way, the difference between the headline pledge and the measurable commitment has become a central issue in assessing the programme.
£874 million pledge raises questions over results
The controversy has intensified following the announcement of another £432 million in funding, taking the total investment behind Burnham’s commitment to £874 million.
The additional money is intended to sustain the programme beyond the winter and through to the end of the current Parliament. The Government says it wants to combine immediate help with longer-term accommodation and support, rather than treating Christmas as the end of the effort. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search0″,”turn544723search8”]} />
The scale of the funding raises an obvious question: how will taxpayers know whether the money is achieving its intended purpose?
The Government will need to demonstrate not only how many people receive offers of assistance, but also how many move into accommodation, how long they remain there and how many subsequently return to sleeping rough.
A programme that moves people temporarily into emergency accommodation may provide essential protection from winter weather. However, it would not necessarily resolve the underlying causes of homelessness if people later return to the streets because they cannot find stable housing or access appropriate support.
The Government’s longer-term plans include funding for new homes and intensive support for people experiencing prolonged homelessness. Its initial programme was expected to help provide 1,200 homes and support at least 3,000 people over five years. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search5″,”turn544723search7”]} />
Those measures could provide a foundation for more sustainable results, but delivery will depend on local housing availability, council capacity and the ability of support services to meet complex needs.
The additional funding is therefore an important part of the programme, but the amount announced is not, by itself, proof that the Christmas target will be achieved.
Homelessness remains a difficult national challenge
The scale of the problem underlines why the Government faces a difficult task.
The latest annual national statistics available at the time of the announcement recorded 4,793 people sleeping rough in England on a single night in autumn 2025. That figure provides a snapshot rather than a complete count of everyone who experiences rough sleeping over the course of a year. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search3″,”turn544723search5”]} />
The number of people sleeping rough can change rapidly. Someone may lose accommodation because of a relationship breakdown, eviction, financial hardship or a health crisis. Others may move between temporary accommodation, hostels and the streets.
That makes it difficult to establish a permanent end point. Even if every person identified on one particular night receives assistance, new cases can emerge the following day.
There is also a distinction between rough sleeping and homelessness more broadly. Many people without secure homes are living in temporary accommodation, staying with friends or relatives, or moving between unsuitable places. A programme focused specifically on rough sleeping will not automatically resolve these wider problems.
Housing campaigners have consequently stressed the importance of increasing the supply of affordable homes and providing sustained support, rather than relying exclusively on emergency accommodation.
Without these longer-term measures, the Government could make progress in bringing people indoors during winter while still facing recurring homelessness throughout the year.
Critics question whether the deadline was realistic
The central criticism of Burnham’s pledge is that a fixed Christmas deadline risks oversimplifying a problem that requires sustained work across housing, healthcare and local government.
The Government has acknowledged that not every person will accept an offer of accommodation. Councils also cannot create suitable permanent housing instantly, particularly in areas where demand already exceeds supply.
In August, Burnham himself recognised that public funding alone might not be sufficient to achieve the ambition, calling on charities, businesses, faith organisations and community groups to contribute. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search6″,”turn544723search15”]} />
That reliance on wider cooperation reflects the complexity of the task. Local authorities may identify someone who needs help but struggle to find suitable accommodation. A person may be offered a bed but require specialist support that is unavailable locally. Another may accept temporary accommodation but later lose it.
These are practical challenges rather than proof that the entire programme is pointless. Nevertheless, they show why the Government must explain how its promise will be measured and what will happen when the Christmas deadline passes.
A clear assessment should distinguish between people who have been offered help, people who have moved into accommodation and those who have secured a lasting route out of homelessness.
What happens after Christmas?
Burnham has said the programme is intended to continue well beyond the festive period. The additional £432 million is designed to sustain the work through the remainder of the Parliament, suggesting that the Government sees Christmas as an important milestone rather than the final stage of its homelessness strategy. <Cite refs={[“turn544723search0″,”turn544723search8”]} />
The real test will be whether the Government can turn emergency interventions into lasting outcomes.
That means ensuring that people can access suitable housing, that councils have the resources to respond quickly and that individuals with complex needs receive support for as long as necessary. It also means preventing people from becoming homeless in the first place wherever possible.
The Government will need to publish meaningful results so that the public can judge whether the funding is reducing rough sleeping and improving the lives of those affected.
For people sleeping on the streets, the distinction between political success and failure is ultimately less important than whether help is available when they need it and whether that help leads to a secure place to live.
Burnham’s promise has placed a clear deadline on the Government’s ambition. His subsequent admission has made clear that he cannot guarantee that every person will accept the assistance offered or that rough sleeping will disappear entirely by Christmas.
Whether the programme deserves to be described as a failure will depend on the results achieved, not simply on whether the streets are completely empty on December 25.
The Government has committed substantial funding and set out a national plan, but it must now demonstrate that the money translates into real, lasting improvements. As Christmas approaches, the most important measure will be how many people receive effective support and how many are able to leave rough sleeping behind for good.