Andy Burnham has indicated that he could introduce a new “death tax” capable of raising billions of pounds to finance an NHS-style social care system, arguing that support must be free at the point of use.

The Prime Minister said he was willing to “grasp the nettle” and establish a National Care Service, even if the move made him “unpopular” after years of political deadlock over social care reform.

Mr Burnham said the death of his father, Roy, last week had strengthened his resolve to tackle the care system’s shortcomings. His father needed support after developing Alzheimer’s disease.

Speaking to the BBC as the Labour conference opened in Liverpool, Mr Burnham said the proposed reforms would feature in Labour’s manifesto for the next general election.

His comments suggested that tax increases could be needed. Mr Burnham said Labour’s 2024 manifesto commitments made it “hard to do in this Parliament”, meaning he would present his plans to voters at the next election, expected in 2029.

“I am prepared to put myself in that position, recognising that it might be difficult or unpopular with some,” he said.

Chris Philp, the Tory shadow minister, responded: “We do not support tax increases. This country is already taxed too highly.”

A care service modelled on the NHS and free at the point of use could cost as much as £18.5 billion a year by 2035/36, according to estimates from the Health Foundation think tank.

Mr Burnham dismissed that figure, arguing that a stronger social care system would reduce pressure on the NHS by preventing people from requiring emergency treatment or hospital beds.

He added: “People are paying care charges now. They are using tens of thousands of pounds from their savings and, in some cases, losing their homes.

“That is what is happening at the moment. So to suggest there is no cost to people today is wrong — there is an enormous cost.”

“Social care in England is as unfair as American healthcare, where the most vulnerable people can lose everything. They can be wiped out not only by the condition they have, but financially as well.”

Mr Burnham told the BBC that social care should operate according to NHS principles.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Gaza War Death Toll Surpasses 74,000 Palestinians as Key Middle East Developments Continue

Under that approach, “everyone contributes, everyone is covered”. However, he noted that Baroness Casey has been asked to develop the detailed proposals.

Mr Burnham said his conference speech on Tuesday would set out a “vision” for reform, but ruled out introducing changes before the general election, insisting that the public would need to approve them.

“I won’t leave office without having grasped this nettle,” he told the Mirror in a separate interview.

“It is a priority for me, and I will face it. And it may make me unpopular, but I’m going to do it,” Mr Burnham added.

Mr Burnham is also facing a turbulent Labour conference, with ministers divided over migration and figures on the Left accusing him of “ghosting” them.

The PM is in Liverpool kicking off his first gathering since ousting Keir Starmer – but with mounting evidence that the same bitter infighting will blight his leadership.

Tensions have flared after Angela Rayner doubled down on her criticism of Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s ‘un-British’ plans to make it harder for migrants to gain permanent residence in the UK. 

Ms Rayner insisted this morning that there were ‘no splits’ and pointed out that Mr Burnham wanted ministers to ‘do politics differently’ by speaking out. ‘We’re not having an argument about immigration, we’re having a conversation – a national conversation,’ she told Sky News.  

But the Housing Secretary’s intervention has been described by MPs as a ‘drive-by shooting’.

Meanwhile, Left-wingers have been openly sniping at Mr Burnham’s approach. Clive Lewis – once such a fervent ally suggested he could stand down so the former Manchester mayor could re-enter the Commons – said the PM had ‘left his allies behind’ on entering No10 and behaved ‘terribly’.

The PM also fuelled fresh doubts about the Heathrow Airport expansion – just weeks after his Chancellor backed it.

Mr Burnham repeatedly refused to endorse the scheme to build a third runway, suggesting it was a matter ‘for London‘ and the Government was waiting for the outcome of a consultation.  

But John Healey told the Commons earlier this month that the Government supports the project.

Mr Burnham has a record of attacks on the proposal going back years. In January last year the then-Manchester mayor branded it a ‘model for an ever-overheating UK economy’, warning it could not come at the ‘expense of essential investment in northern infrastructure’.

Yesterday Heathrow revealed that the project could be delayed four years until 2039. 

Just six weeks ago, Jale Sito was working full-time in civil construction, exercising almost every day and raising two young children with his pregnant wife.

The 32-year-old Sydney father had no known health problems and no family history of heart disease. His life was demanding, but otherwise seemed entirely ordinary.

That changed when a persistent illness, which Jale and his wife Tina initially believed was another virus brought home from daycare, revealed itself to be something far more serious.

‘We went to emergency on the Tuesday night, still feeling very hopeful that we were gonna come home, pack our bags, fly out the next morning,’ Tina, 31, told the Daily Mail.

Within five hours, doctors had diagnosed Jale with heart failure. His heart was working at only 15 per cent, and he was told he had advanced heart failure with a life expectancy of five years without a transplant.

His life has been transformed almost overnight. Jale can no longer work, drive or exercise, and it is unclear whether he will ever be able to return to the physically demanding career he once had.

Tina, who is seven months pregnant, has spent the past six weeks moving between hospital and home while caring for their two children and trying to understand how her previously healthy husband became critically ill.

‘It did come as a complete shock to us. It’s still very new, still very raw,’ she said.

From healthy to critically ill

Born in New Zealand to a Fijian family, Jale moved to Australia when he was five and grew up with his three brothers. He later built a career in civil construction and was deeply committed to fitness, training most days and sometimes twice a day.

Jale and Tina are active members of their church, where he plays drums in the music ministry most Sundays. At home, their focus was on Helena and Achileas, while they prepared to welcome their third child later this year.

As a family with young children, they were used to illnesses circulating through the household. But from April 2026, Jale appeared unable to fully recover from one infection before another arrived. 

After catching adenovirus and rhinovirus from the children, he developed fatigue, a loss of appetite and a runny nose. The family sought medical advice repeatedly.

‘We were pretty much at the doctor’s every second week,’ Tina said.

Although his symptoms improved temporarily, they kept returning, following what seemed to be the familiar pattern of daycare viruses.

By July, however, Jale was suffering from extreme fatigue, breathlessness and a wheeze unlike anything he had experienced before.

The symptoms looked like a virus

Because Jale had no history of asthma or other major medical conditions, doctors initially suspected he was experiencing a post-viral wheeze. 

He was prescribed Ventolin and prednisone, but even after six days on steroids, there was little relief. His legs began to swell, which the couple attributed to medication side effects.

Jale also worked night shifts up to 60 hours per week, so fatigue and tiredness had seemed normal.

‘We know the general heart attack signs, but heart failure was very different,’ Tina said.

Just before a planned family holiday to Fiji, Tina arranged another doctor’s appointment to ensure Jale was well enough to travel. 

At that appointment, his blood pressure was very low and his heart rate unusually high. He was sent to emergency for further assessment, and the planned holiday was suddenly forgotten.

Heart failure diagnosis

Jale spent four weeks in intensive care, undergoing cardiac MRI, angiogram, ultrasounds and X-rays. 

Doctors found severe damage affecting both sides of his heart; it was functioning at only 15 per cent. They believe his condition may have developed suddenly within six months, although the cause remains unknown.

The family has started a GoFundMe to aid them as Jale steps away from work. 

‘They are calling him the “mystery man”, because they can’t seem to detect what’s caused it,’ Tina said.

The lack of an explanation has been tough for a family who have made a conscious effort to stay healthy. 

MUST READ: Trump Administration Eyes Baseball Stadium Inside U.S. National Park

Routine blood tests in January insisted Jale was fit – and slightly elevated kidney and liver markers in July proved unrelated, as heart failure requires specific testing.

Five years without a transplant

As doctors established the extent of the damage, Tina said Jale was told he had advanced heart failure and, without a transplant, a life expectancy of five years. 

He was referred to St Vincent’s Hospital in Sydney to start assessment for a transplant and explore interim treatments.

‘Hearing the words heart transplant at 32 was overwhelming, but the data looks hopeful,’ Tina said. 

The family is hanging on to that hope while specialists continue investigating.

ICU complications and fragile homecoming

Jale’s stay in intensive care was complicated when he contracted COVID, RSV and pneumonia. He was discharged on September 16 with a PICC line for antibiotics, and a community nurse began daily visits.

His return home has been fragile. The family called an ambulance three times as his medical team worked to balance medications. The night before Tina spoke about his condition, Jale was back in hospital, coming home the next morning.

Now, Tina and Jale monitor his blood pressure and fluid intake, keeping daily records and staying alert to any changes.

‘He’s not allowed to drive, work or exercise’

For a man fiercely independent just weeks earlier, the physical restrictions have been confronting.

‘He was very active, very hands-on, working full-time, quite independent, to then being told he’s not allowed to drive, work or exercise,’ Tina said.

Even walking is now restricted, and doctors say Jale may not return to civil construction – even after a transplant. Depending on his recovery, they may look at study or finding a less physically demanding career.

‘I guess we’re going to have to explore what the new normal will look like,’ Tina said.

Four-year-old Helena has become his shadow

Achileas is too young to fully understand, but four-year-old Helena knew something was wrong.

‘She took it the hardest. Daycare said she was quite emotional, so helping her regulate her emotions during that transition was challenging,’ Tina said.

Helena sent pictures to hospital and, when she could visit him in the ICU, the family tried to keep some of their old routine intact. Since Jale came home, Helena has rarely left his side, helping with blood pressure checks and sleeping next to him.

Rather than shutting her out, Tina and Jale have involved her in small, positive ways to help her understand.

‘You still have to be Mum, but you want to be a wife’

Tina is due to give birth in two months and has spent the latter part of her pregnancy moving between Jale’s hospital bedside and their two children at home.

‘It’s just been survival mode, because I am seven months pregnant and we still have two young kids that need my attention,’ she said.

‘The most challenging part is you still have to be Mum, but you want to be a wife and be there for your spouse.’

She has worried about Jale coping mentally with losing his independence, while trying to protect her own health and that of their unborn baby.

Family, friends and church community have stepped in, collecting the kids, delivering groceries and meals, and helping with bedtime so Tina could support Jale.

‘Having people aware and just taking that burden off has been a massive relief,’ Tina said.

Their new normal

Jale is now home and, despite uncertainty, remains in good spirits. His faith and children are sources of motivation as he follows strict medical advice.

The family is beginning the transplant process at St Vincent’s while specialists keep searching for an explanation.

For Tina, the experience has changed how she views persistent symptoms, especially those easily explained by work or parenting.

‘If you have several symptoms that persist, don’t sweep them under the rug. Keep seeing your GP and ask for further testing – it can save your life,’ she said.

Six weeks ago, Tina and Jale expected to board a flight to Fiji. Now, they are preparing for the possibility of a heart transplant, the arrival of their third child and a future neither could have imagined at the start of the year.

‘You always hear, “Don’t take life for granted”, but going through a health crisis really shines a different perspective on what matters,’ Tina said.

A brief moment of prayer carried weight far beyond its quiet appearance, touching history, morality and politics.

During his visit to France, Pope Leo XIV paused at a staircase in the Garden of the Carmelites, located on the campus of the Catholic University of Paris. The four stone steps bear the Latin inscription Hic Ceciderunt—“Here they fell,” referring to those who were killed. As flowers framed the weathered memorial, the Pope bowed his head while cameras captured the scene.

The memorial recalls the violence of September 1792, three years after the French Revolution began. The uprising targeted the monarchy of King Louis XVI, but its increasingly radical campaign also turned fiercely against the Catholic Church.

The revolutionaries even attempted to establish a competing system of belief, known as the Culte de la Raison, or Cult of Reason. Its formal ceremonies were short-lived, although critics argue that modern secular humanism can sometimes function like a belief system of its own.

There is an important distinction, however: forming a new philosophy is one thing; building it through the murder of people who follow another faith is something else entirely. That kind of ideological violence belongs among history’s most destructive political movements, including the Khmer Rouge.

Historian Christopher Hibbert described the bloodshed at the Carmelite convent—the same history Leo encountered during his prayer—in stark detail:

“A gang of armed men burst into the garden of the Carmelite Convent off the Rue de Vaugirard where about 150 priests who had been held prisoner for the past fortnight, were gathered under guard . . . The men advanced upon them, calling out for the Archbishop of Arles. One of the priests went forward to meet them, demanding a fair trial for himself and his fellow-prisoners. A shot was fired and his shoulder was smashed. The Archbishop, after praying for a moment on his knees, then went towards the men himself. ‘I am the man you are looking for,’ he said, and was immediately struck across the face with a sword. As he fell to the ground a pike was plunged through his chest.”

The remaining clergy were then killed, their bodies piled together. For Catholics, there is some consolation in the fact that the Church later recognized these victims as martyrs and beatified them.

On one level, Pope Leo’s visit to the Garden of the Carmelites was an uncomplicated act of Christian remembrance: he was honoring fellow believers who died for their faith.

But the gesture also carried a political message directed toward the French state. Even after the Revolution’s violence subsided, France’s leading political forces continued to view the Catholic Church with deep suspicion. Laws enacted in the early 20th century sought to reduce religion’s public influence. The government was no longer executing priests, but it was placing severe limits on their work and activities.

That approach, known as laïcité or state secularism, has largely remained part of French public life. From an American perspective, it might resemble a system in which organizations such as the ACLU held decisive authority over churches and religious communities. The contrast is especially notable to critics who believe France—and, in their view, the ACLU—has shown greater tolerance toward Islam than toward Christianity.

But now comes the Pope. His whole visit, featuring spectacular pageantry, as well as up-close-and-personal missions, has provided an alternative vision of France, for the French.  A vision of Christianity and its related traditions, not atheism with a carveout of favoritism for Islam. 

And then there’s that homage to the martyrs—a direct rebuke to the murderous antecedents of French President Emmanuel Macron’s government, which today flies the same tricolour flag that inspired the 18th-century assassins. A rough equivalent in the U.S. would be if the Pope had come here and paid his respects at a memorial to the British Redcoats who fought against the Patriots in the American Revolution. 

To drill his implicit critique further, the Pope celebrated a mass at the Place de la Concorde, formerly known as the Place de la Revolution, the very place where, during the revolutionary Reign of Terror, thousands of Christians were publicly executed. 

Leo’s steady dignity, his measured sense of purpose—and okay, his showmanship—recalls his trip to Spain in May, where he was equally correct and resolute in his remembrance of those martyred by that country’s past left-wing terrorists.

Indeed, we might think back further, to Pope John Paul II’s mission to Poland in 1979. Back then, Poland was a captive nation, held in bondage by the Red Army of Soviet Russia.  Yet the Pope’s peaceful pilgrimage to his home country unleashed a tidal wave of sentiment that helped power, first, the anti-communist Solidarity movement of Lech Wałęsa and then, secondarily, the epochal fracturing of Moscow’s evil empire in Eastern Europe.  

To be sure, the French government, and the myrmidon edifice of the European Union, are not as bad as the communism of old. And yet France and the EU are plenty bureaucratic, heading toward stultification and socialism of some kind, and seemingly fully desirous of snuffing out freedom of religion (at least for Christians), albeit on a slower timeline.  

In fact, one contribution of the Trump-Vance administration has been to highlight this planned subversion of ancient rights and rites. Both Donald Trump and JD Vance have broken with past trans-Atlantic platitudes, warning the Europeans that their secular bureaucratic progressivism is, in fact, a threat to liberty, as well as to prosperity. 

The truth is that all moral struggles take place in three time phases: the present day, of course, but also the future and the past. That is, to succeed in persuasion, a protagonist must paint a picture of a better future, and it’s also vital to teach from history, to use past events to illustrate the successes to emulate—or the failures not to repeat.

This Pope knows that the French Revolution is the fons et origo of all left-wing revolutions—from Russia to China to Cuba to Cambodia—in which the faithful, including Catholics, were often the first victims.

Revealingly, here in the U.S., a leading left-wing publication calls itself Jacobin, after the most guillotine-happy faction of the French revolutionists. (And that title serves as a warning: what the hardcore left would do to us if it had the power.) 

So by his quiet actions, Leo is striking at the root of the revolutionary left, undercutting their legitimacy by reminding the rest of us that they are, if they gain the power, murderous.

Why, one could even say that Leo is wielding the sword of the Lord, striking blows for the prayerful victory of righteous memory.

The controversial Orange Order parade will take place this morning for the first time in almost three decades, following a late-night court decision.

In what was described as an “unprecedented” sitting of the High Court in Belfast, judges upheld the Parades Commission’s decision to allow the march along Garvaghy Road.

However, thousands of protesters gathered in heavy rain shortly before the Protestant parade was due to start in Portadown.

The demonstrators joined hands and sang as they sought to prevent the march from proceeding. A loudspeaker warning told them they could be arrested for taking part in an unauthorised parade.

Large groups formed along Garvaghy Road in the hours before the parade’s scheduled 8am departure, with many people in the crowd wearing balaclavas.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham urged “calm on all sides”, warning that Northern Ireland had made “big gains” and that “we don’t want to see things go backwards”.

Armoured vehicles have been deployed, while police are carrying out checks on the main routes into Portadown.

According to the BBC, officers are handing drivers an information sheet stating: “You are entitled to disagree with the procession and to make your views known peacefully.

“The procession has been permitted by a determination of the Parades Commission. People taking part in it also have a right to do so peacefully and safely.”

Sinn Féin president Mary Lou McDonald and First Minister Michelle O’Neill were among the party figures who joined the protest.

Speaking to reporters, Ms O’Neill said: “There must be no march through this community. That is how we restore calm, that is how we restore confidence.”

She continued: “Why, after 28 years of determination to block a march down this road, did the Parades Commission think this was the right idea today? To bring this mess back onto this community.”

“I commend this community. We stand with this community and we will continue to stand with this community.”

Ms O’Neill said the revival of the Drumcree dispute “brings into question how this whole peace process works”.

Some protesters blocking Garvaghy Road on Sunday morning could be heard shouting: “Bring Stormont down.”

Asked whether she believed Stormont could collapse because of the Drumcree dispute, the First Minister replied: “I think that this brings into question how this whole peace process works.

“The progress of the last 28 years has been brought into question by the actions of the Orange Order and those within political unionism who want to drag us backwards. I think that brings into question what you heard here today.

“You heard the people’s views of Stormont. You heard their views on whether politics is working for them. We have heard that time and time again, including throughout the last 24 hours.”

‘What’s the point? What’s the point whenever people are going to railroad over their rights? Whenever they’re going to try to roll back in 28 years of progress?

‘But I can tell you what we’re about. We’re about the future. We’re about building on our peace and progress. We’re about not allowing people to bring us back.’

McDonald told reporters it was ‘madness’ that the Orange Order parade was going ahead. 

She said: ‘This, in fact, is primitive treatment of any community in the year 2026. It is intolerable, and it will not be tolerated. 

‘This is a dignified and united community, and they are absolutely determined that they and we will not be drawn back into the past.’

A small group of Orange Order members wearing traditional silk orange sashes and black bowler hats gathered at another part of the town, a picture posted on X by Democratic Unionist Party lawmaker Carla Lockhart, showed 

Loud cheers erupted from the crowds on Garvaghy Road after being informed the Orange Order had left Drumcree.

The cheers were soon followed by chants of ‘Bring Stormont down’ from some of the protesters.

The march was finally given the go ahead at a hearing which concluded at 2.15am on Sunday after legal teams repeated their arguments over the contentious parade, which was a notorious flashpoint of the Troubles in the 90s.

The time-limited sitting beginning at 12.20am on Sunday was heard before Justice Michael Humphreys.

He acknowledged the ‘unusual if not unprecedented circumstances as it is now 1.45am, with a parade scheduled to begin in just over six hours’ time’.

Outlining his decision, Mr Justice Humphreys cited case law that as a public body the courts must respect its judgment and ‘their decisions will not be lightly interfered with’.

He said: ‘The picture painted here is of a public body which took evidence from the relevant sources, weighed up the key issues which were in play and arrived at a reasoned decision.

‘The jurisdiction to impugn (a) public body’s decision on that basis is necessarily limited to cases where no reasonable decision could arrive at that outcome and in my view, in this case that threshold has not been met.’

He added: ‘This court cannot substitute its own view or anyone else’s view for that of the commission.’

Northern Ireland’s most senior judge, Lady Chief Justice Siobhan Keegan, described the situation as ‘unprecedented’.

Justices Keegan and Humphreys joined Lady Justice Denise McBride in the Court of Appeal which, in the late hours of Saturday, upheld an appeal by Portadown Orangeman Alan Hynes to allow the march to go ahead.

The stand-off at Drumcree made headlines in the 1990s, with nationalist residents of the Garvaghy Road opposed to the parade passing through the area, leading to violent clashes for several summers and political tension necessitating a major security operation.

The Orange Order has unsuccessfully applied for more than a quarter of a century to complete its 1998 walk along its traditional route.

On Friday, the commission reversed its long-running determination, to the welcome of unionist parties and outrage of nationalist and republican parties.

On Saturday afternoon, Justice Patricia Smyth blocked the commission’s decision, saying the ‘long-running dispute has the potential to escalate’ across Northern Ireland.

Under the legal framework around parades in Northern Ireland, if the court simply passed an injunction against the Parades Commission ruling in relation to Drumcree, it would allow the Portadown District to carry out the parade without the restrictions outlined by the commission, because it was legally notified.

Justice Smyth passed an injunction pausing the effect of the Orange Order’s notification of the parade, which counsel for the Garvaghy residents had described as ‘novel’ and John Larkin KC, representing Mr Hynes, as ‘rewriting history’.

The Orange Order then lodged an appeal, which was upheld, before the case was remitted to the High Court and heard again before a new judge.

Barrister Denise Kiley KC represented the residents of the largely nationalist Garvaghy Road, outlining their position that much remained unclear about the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI)’s threat assessment provided to the Parades Commission.

She said ‘nowhere’ in the PSNI’s contribution to the commission was there ‘any assessment of future risk’ and was ‘entirely directed to past risk’.

Emma McIlveen, junior counsel for Mr Hynes, argued the Orange Order ‘has gone to great lengths to engage on the ground in the community’.

Ms McIlveen also said it is an issue of the protection of minority rights, describing it as a ‘hecklers’ veto situation’ where ‘those that scream the loudest get what they want’.

Ms Kiley argued the imposition of the injunction ‘does not mean that this parade cannot proceed, it means it cannot proceed tomorrow’.

She added: ‘The only way to preserve the position for this applicant and to preserve the supervisory position of this court was to grant interim relief and it was granted as a last resort.’

Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Parades Commission, said the court’s move to ‘deem a notified parade unnotified’ was ‘entirely unprincipled’.

‘It’s not who threatens the most, it’s that there’s an assumption in favour of legal assembly,’ he said.

‘We cannot have every Parade Commission determination brought back into this court every week, that’s not how it is supposed to work.’

Justice Keegan earlier said ‘there is a major problem that the decision in this case was given after 2pm on a Friday afternoon.

‘This cannot happen again.’