A serious review of MPs’ security is needed following the death of Ann Widdecombe, Andy Burnham has said.
The former Greater Manchester mayor, who is expected to become prime minister next Monday, said politics had “darkened” in the decade he had been away from Westminster.
He said he was “shocked to see how much security now has to be in place”, but added that it may need to be increased further still.
The killing of Widdecombe – a Reform UK spokeswoman and former Conservative MP – is now being investigated by counter-terrorism police, and has prompted renewed debate over the security offered to politicians.
A 28-year-old white British man from Rotherham, South Yorkshire, was arrested on suspicion of murder on Saturday, before being re-arrested on Monday on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.
A leading figure on the right of British politics, the former minister was found dead at her home in Haytor, Devon on Thursday.
Asked why he thought frontline politics had become so dangerous, Burnham said: “It’s easy to blame social media, but it feels like it’s having some impact in just building that kind of toxicity that’s around the political debate.”
He added: “It’s obviously appalling what happened to Ann.
“I knew Ann over many years in the House – we got along and everybody got along, but it feels like something has changed.”
Earlier on Tuesday, Reform’s Robert Jenrick accused the government of a “dereliction of duty” over Nigel Farage’s taxpayer-funded security, claiming it had previously been “downgraded”.
Jenrick said his party leader had not been offered the security he needed, after it emerged Reform turned down an offer of government-funded security last year.
The Home Office said Jenrick’s comments were “categorically untrue”, with a spokesperson adding that ministers were not involved in deciding MPs’ security.
Before he entered Parliament at the 2024 general election, any state-funded security for Farage would have been provided by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec), a team of officials from across government.
Once he became an MP responsibility then switched to the Parliamentary Security Department.
Reform sources say Farage was offered an enhanced security package by parliamentary authorities in July 2024, amounting to two rotating teams of eight security officials.
They say that in September 2025 parliamentary authorities reviewed the threat to the Reform leader and offered a downgraded security package consisting of a car, driver and one close protection officer.
Reform rejected this offer of state-funded support and chose instead to privately fund Farage’s security.
Parliament’s second offer to Farage was still much bigger than the support offered to most MPs.
One MP who also receives enhanced security is understood to have had a driver and one security guard only at certain specific events when the threat to them was deemed sufficiently high.
House of Commons authorities would not confirm or deny whether Farage’s security had been downgraded, but said security was “fundamental to our democracy” and “all MPs are offered appropriate” measures.
A spokesperson added: “Any assessment of an individual MPs’ security arrangements or advice is subject to a rigorous risk-based assessment, conducted by security professionals and with input from the police and a range of professional authorities.
“These are naturally kept under continuous review.”
Farage is not currently an MP after he resigned and triggered a by-election earlier this month, meaning any state-funded security would now be provided by Ravec, rather than Parliament.
The safety of politicians has been a prominent issue in recent years, with the murders of Conservative MP Sir David Amess in 2021 and Labour MP Jo Cox in 2016.
The Conservative government announced a £31m package to increase security for MPs in May 2024.
A 2022 review following Sir David’s murder also led to tailored security advice being given to MPs based on individual circumstances, rather than a standardised set of measures.
Neil Basu, a former head of counter-terrorism policing, said some MPs would be “very well protected” while others “will continually to be struggling to get the Parliamentary security budget to open its coffers and give them the kind of protection they want”.
He later added that providing the highest level of protection to all 650 MPs would require “thousands more armed police officers”.
“It is just not a practical proposition, so you have to prioritise them in some way, shape or form.”
