Burnham’s first reshuffle should resist a sweeping change of junior ministers

The countdown to Andy Burnham’s arrival in No10- has been accompanied by much speculation around his first ministerial line-up. He has not yet announced any appointments – as is the normal process when there is a change of prime minister mid-term – and he should not do so until he becomes PM. Calls for him to name his senior team ahead of access talks with the civil service are constitutionally and practically misplaced. While attention has largely focused on the key cabinet roles, there are around 100 non-cabinet level ministers across the government. Burnham should think carefully about how many these he wants to move – and be aware of the risks of wholesale change.

Burnham will want to make his mark

The chance to appoint a new cabinet is a key moment for an incoming prime minister to set out their priorities to the country and to their party. Burnham has talked about doing politics differently and will want to choose a top team who are on board with his plans for government, including his focus on devolution and a commitment to be open to the views of MPs. He will also want to reward his allies who have supported his recent rapid rise to the top and – presumably – bring in more MPs from the north of England.

The chancellor is always an important appointment, and Burnham’s choice will set the direction for his premiership. But who he chooses as the lead minister on his devolution agenda – and whether they are based in Manchester – is also vital.

Constant ministerial turnover is damaging

While some new appointments are important for Burnham to show that he is different to Starmer, a sweeping change of ministers would be damaging. After the major reshuffle in September 2025, 50% of ministers were in new jobs. This meant they had to get up to speed with their new portfolio, build relationships with their civil servants and external stakeholders, and work out what their priorities are and whether these differ from those of their predecessor. Inevitably, the work of the department as a whole slows down during this period.

There may be some roles where stability is particularly important. The recent change of defence secretary, coupled with ongoing global instability, might present a strong argument to leave the bulk of the ministers – who have built relationships with foreign counterparts – in the Foreign Office and the MoD in place, particularly given Burnham’s early pronouncements do not suggest a radical change of direction in foreign policy.

Other departments, where Burnham wants to signal a change of direction, might expect more change – but it is not just ministers who deal with foreign crises who benefit from stability.

Many ministers at lower levels do important work

Across government, more junior ministers – ministers of state and parliamentary under secretaries – are the ones who, often out of the spotlight, are getting things done. They manage programmes, shepherd legislation, build relationships and generally drive progress on things that are not high-profile enough to get cabinet level attention, but which make a practical difference to peoples’ lives across the country.

Burnham has said he wants to stick to the 2024 manifesto and that he does not plan to hold an early election. He will of course want to show that he has a different team and that he is doing things in a different way. But he should appoint new ministers because they have the particular skills or relevant experience to deliver his priorities. At this stage of the parliament, if the prime minister is not clear why he is reshuffling a minister then he would be wiser to leave them to get on with the job.