The Times corrects legal claim on dual mandate and Andy Burnham

The Times has issued a correction to a recent commentary after mischaracterising the legal framework governing dual mandates for UK elected officials. An opinion piece on 26 January suggested that Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) could have changed party rules to allow Andy Burnham to hold both his role as a mayor with policing powers and serve as a Member of Parliament “at least until the next general election.” That formulation was incorrect.

In reality, it is a matter of UK law, not internal party rules, that prevents mayors who exercise policing powers from also sitting in the House of Commons. The alleged remedy — a change to Labour’s party rules by the NEC — would not have addressed the legal prohibition. The correction, published on 28 January 2026, clarifies this distinction and acknowledges that the original commentary misstated the source of the constraint on dual mandates.

The error illustrates how conflating internal party flexibility with statutory legal limits can mislead readers about what is permissible for elected office-holders. In the UK, legislation governing the conduct and eligibility of public officials can override any party’s internal arrangements, and the specific restriction on serving simultaneously as a mayor with policing responsibilities and an MP reflects a legal safeguard intended to avoid conflicts between roles.

The Times said it was “happy to make this clear,” acknowledging that the earlier piece did not accurately distinguish between party governance and legal obligations. While the broader debate about the desirability of dual mandates in UK politics continues, the correction underscores that this debate must be grounded in the correct understanding of the law.