Andy Burnham, the Labour mayor of Manchester, is preparing for the upcoming Makerfield by‑election while his record in the city comes under intense examination. critics point to soaring regional debt, a failed congestion‑charging pilot and a abandoned clean‑air zone as evidence of mis‑management. As the by‑election approaches, the question is whether voters will overlook these setbacks in favour of his high‑profile profile.

£1.43 billion debt burden on Greater Manchester Combined Authority

According to the source, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) carries liabilities of £1.43 billion, a figure that has drawn criticism from fiscal watchdogs. This debt level, compounded by occasional borrowing spikes, fuels concerns that Burnham’s economic stewadrship may be unsustainable for taxpayers.

£100 million wasted on aborted congestion‑charging scheme

The report notes that Burnham’s attempt to introduce a congestion charge in Manchester collapsed,costing the public over £100 million. The failed pilot not only drained resources but also damaged confidence in the mayor’s ability to deliver complex transport reforms.

Clean‑air zone plan scrapped after public backlash

Burnham’s proposal for a clean‑air zone, intended to curb pollution, was met with strong opposition and ultimately abandoned, as the source explains. The reversal highlights a pattern of policy reversals that opponents argue undermine his credibility on environmental issues.

Makerfield by‑election as litmus test for Westminster ambitions

The upcoming Makerfield by‑election is being watched as a barometer for Burnham’s prospects in a Westminster contest. As the source points out, heightened scrutiny of his Manchester record could shape voter peception well beyond the city’s borders.

Who will decide if Burnham’s “King of the North” brand survives?

Open questions remain about whether Labour’s national leadership will back Burnham despite the controversies, and how rival parties will leverage the debt and failed schemes in their campaigning. The source provides no comment from Burnham’s camp, leaving the political calculus uncertain.