Tag: United Kingdom

Dementia is the defining health and social care challenge of our time. Nearly one million people in the UK are living with the condition and it is the leading cause of death.  One in two of us will be affected by dementia in our lifetime, either through a diagnosis or by caring for a loved one.

Despite the known and growing impact of dementia, acknowledged by the political class over the last decade or more, the disease has been removed from NHS England’s Planning Guidance this year – with the full knowledge and support of the health secretary, Wes Streeting. The word ‘dementia’ does not feature once. The best thing we can do to support people living with dementia is to enable them to get a diagnosis, but the long-standing diagnosis target has also been scrapped. This is not the ‘change’ people voted for. Labour promised to prioritise the NHS – yet dementia has been dropped from the agenda entirely. We must put dementia firmly back on the health and social care agenda to ensure families get the high-quality care and support they need. Improving dementia care must be a priority.

First and foremost, dementia has a huge social impact and places extraordinary pressure on individuals and family members with no formal caring qualifications and who may be living with poor health themselves. But it also has a significant impact on the economy and puts pressure on the public purse – something the Treasury is more likely to respond to. The total cost of dementia in the UK stands at a staggering £42 billion per year. One in four hospital beds is occupied by someone with dementia. These patients stay in hospital twice as long, on average, as those without the condition. There isn’t the support outside hospitals to allow for timely discharge to an environment which is both better for the patient and more cost effective. Against this backdrop – which is no secret – the decision to remove the disease from the Planning Guidance seems particularly unfathomable. It makes it more likely, not less, that the experience of those affected by dementia will get worse while the costs to the public purse will grow.

Beyond the statistics, the human impact of dementia is devastating. Families are left to cope alone with the daily challenges of the disease. Carers and family members have become physically and emotionally drained, facing an uphill battle to access the right support. Many are at breaking point, but they are the people the “system” relies on. A new report by Maria Petrillo from the Centre for Care has demonstrated the financial penalty of undertaking a caring role is greater for women.

The lack of a clear, integrated support pathway means that people with dementia and their families face unnecessary obstacles to accessing the care they need. The structural problem with separation of health care – universal and free at the point of use, and social care – means tested and the responsibility of local councils – is perhaps best (or worst) demonstrated by the experiences of people with dementia. The broken divide between NHS healthcare and council-run social care is failing people with dementia. The forthcoming NHS 10-Year Plan must commit to fixing it.

I have seen the lack of integration in services first-hand during my time working for Dementia UK before I entered parliament. Admiral Nurses operate in and around the health and social care ‘gap’ to help the transition between different health and care settings. They provide wrap-around support for the whole family. By helping to solve the needs of family carers they solve the biggest need for the person with the dementia diagnosis – a carer better equipped to undertake their caring role. We need more specialist dementia nurses, including in hospitals, to help reduce avoidable hospital admissions and, where admissions happen, to support early discharge. This would not only improve health outcomes but also reduce pressure for hospital beds.

The government cannot afford to be complacent, but nor can the Opposition. Dementia must be recognised as a national priority, with dedicated resources and a clear plan for delivery. Without this commitment, the crisis will only deepen, and more families will be left to struggle alone. We owe it to those living with dementia, and to their loved ones, to act now.

Let’s put dementia back on the agenda – and build a future where no family has to face it alone.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

Labour’s vow to set out only one major “fiscal event” a year, detailed in its election manifesto, was designed to serve as a definite signal of a new era: in the place of political chaos and fiscal unpredictability — symbolised by the rise and rapid fall of Liz Truss — stability would reign. No longer would Britain reel from one economic programme to the next.

But as Rachel Reeves declared today, the “world has changed”. The circumstances that saw Labour catapulted to Downing Street as the harbingers of stability have reorganised themselves. The spring statement had initially been pencilled into ministerial diaries as a mere update. But the surrounding context has reimagined it as a defining moment in the story of this government, as Keir Starmer and Reeves adapt to the brutal realities that have befallen them.

That said, for all the emphasis Labour has placed on the shifting geopolitical tides, the spring statement today was given meaning by those factors that remain constant. Labour’s strictures — its fiscal rules, tax pledges and political commitments — still limit the chancellor’s agency.

Reeves’ self-imposed rules, which she stresses are “non-negotiable”, restrict her borrowing to fund day-to-day public spending. Labour’s manifesto pledge — to leave income tax, VAT and national insurance untouched — deprives Reeves of the Treasury’s most effective revenue-raisers. Meanwhile, the chancellor has committed to reviving Britain’s ailing public services and, crucially, rejecting any return to austerity.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

This is the same political-fiscal framework that dictated Labour’s travails in the long lead-in to the autumn budget. In October, the chancellor left herself around £9.9 billion of fiscal headroom (the buffer between the government’s fiscal rules and spending/tax plans; or money available for additional spending). That was after the government announced tax rises worth £40 billion, and £76 billion of new public spending. Ministers just about stuck to their tax commitments (a manifesto loophole allowed for an employer NI hike). Their spending plans neutralised accusations of “austerity 2.0”.

In the end, with just the £9.9 billion to spare, Reeves stuck to her fiscal rules.

But the economic conditions have worsened drastically since October, and Reeves’ leeway has vanished. The chancellor revealed today that the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) has revised down the UK’s growth forecast for 2025 from 2 per cent in the autumn to 1 per cent.

Reeves admitted her headroom had been wiped out, leaving the chancellor £4.1 billion in the red. She went on to outline £14 billion worth of cuts, designed to restore the government’s fiscal position to its status in the autumn.

Most of the policy announcements, on welfare, aid and defence spending, had been aggressively publicised beforehand. That includes the reporting yesterday which revealed the OBR had rejected the government’s estimate its welfare reforms will return £5 billion to the exchequer — concluding instead that the changes to disability and incapacity benefits will only save £3.4 billion.

This £1.6 billion shortfall has impelled Reeves to drive deeper with her cuts, confirming a few “final adjustments”. On top of already announced changes to disability and sickness benefits then, Reeves said the universal credit standard allowance will increase from £92 per week in 2025/26 to £106 pounds a week by 2029/30, while the universal credit health elements will be cut to the new claimants by around 50 per cent and then frozen.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

As expected, there were no more tax rises. But the chancellor did claim she will raise an extra billion pounds by cracking down harder on tax evasion. Meanwhile, savings — courtesy of “Whitehall efficiencies” — were promised. Reeves said a “leaner” government would spend £6.1 billion less on day-to-day operations by 2029-30.

Reeves told the commons: “Overall, day-to-day spending will be reduced by £6.1 billion by 2029-30 and it will now grow by an average of 1.2 per cent a year above inflation compared to 1.3 per cent in the Autumn.”

These measures will ensure the government’s books are balanced. Citing OBR figures, Reeves said the government’s budget will move from a deficit of £36.1 billion in 2025/26 and £13.4 billion in 2026/27, to a surplus of £6 billion in 2027/28, £7.1 billion in 2028/29 and £9.9 billion in 2029/30.

Confronting internal criticism, Reeves implicitly insisted that today’s statement will not deliver “austerity 2.0”. In fact, Reeves sought to reassure MPs “that day-to-day spending will increase in real terms, above inflation, in every single year of the forecast.”

She added: “And in the spending review, apart from the reduction in overseas aid, day-to-day spending across government has been fully protected.”

But a Labour rebellion is brewing nonetheless. While Reeves’ path may prove economically sustainable, backbench MPs stand ready to voice political and moral objections. The welfare cuts, of course, have gone deeper than would-be-rebels had anticipated.

At prime minister’s questions prior to the spring statement, SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn shared his own experience of disability and asked Keir Starmer to explain to children “how the Labour party making mum and dad poor will lift them out of poverty”.

In the end, the political ramifications will only become clear once Labour backbenchers have descended on the details of the spring statement (and associated impact assessments) with their red highlighters.

These measures however, even if they are swallowed by the Parliamentary Labour Party, will do nothing to reorder the political-fiscal logic that landed Reeves in this situation in the first instance. Her fiscal rules remain intact; her tax pledges unbusted; and Labour still insists austerity is not and will never be on the agenda. Donald Trump’s second non-consecutive term is just beginning.

And so the build-up to the autumn budget begins. Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, has already described Reeves’ statement as a “holding exercise ahead of the really significant decisions later in the year.”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

He adds: “What the chancellor has all but guaranteed is another six months of damaging speculation and uncertainty over tax policy. That didn’t go well between last July’s election and October’s budget.

“I fear a longer rerun this year.”

Reeves did unveil some good news about growth this afternoon. She revealed the OBR has upgraded the UK’s growth forecasts from next year, and for “every single year thereafter”. (Growth of 1 per cent in 2025, 1.9 per cent in 2026, 1.8 per cent in 2027, 1.7 per cent in 2028 and finally 1.8 per cent in 2029 still falls short of pre-election expectations, it should be said).

Concluding her speech, the chancellor said the OBR had scored the government’s housebuilding plans and found they will add £15.1 billion to the UK economy within a decade.

Staring down the opposition benches, Reeves maintained: “I say to the party opposite — the British people will be watching, because if the party opposite do not support these reforms they are opposing economic growth.

“We are clear on this side whose side we are on, the opposition parties must decide too.”

The chancellor will hope that this news on growth, which she delivered rousingly at the despatch box this afternoon, eases Labour worries and holds back the opposition charge.

But she will recognise that the government’s economic battles are far from over. Reeves’ fiscal tightrope, navigated today by a careful balancing act, stretches far into the future — with geopolitical headwinds still swirling.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Reeves to unveil more welfare cuts in spring statement, defence secretary signals

Lunchtime soundbite

‘She is the chancellor who said she would not increase borrowing, but she did. She said she wouldn’t change her fiscal rules, but she did.

‘She said she wouldn’t put up national insurance, but she did. She said she wouldn’t cut winter fuel payment, but she did.

‘She said she wouldn’t tax farmers, but she did.’

—  Responding to the spring statement in the House of Commons today, shadow chancellor Mel Stride says “this chancellor has made all the wrong choices.”

Now try this…

‘UK spring statement: Rachel Reeves’ Project Growth still isn’t paying off’
British chancellor unveils latest fiscal update Wednesday as Labour MPs press for a Plan B, writes Politico’s Dan Bloom and Annabelle Dickson.

‘Wes Streeting: Israel’s attacks on Gaza are “unjustifiable” and “intolerable”’
Via the Guardian.

‘Why No 10 isn’t worried about a full-blown Labour rebellion’
Quite how many MPs would rebel against the Government is unclear – but the Spring Statement gives them the chance to compare notes, writes the i’s Kitty Donaldson. (Paywall)

On this day in 2023:

Michael Gove apologises to standards watchdog over failure to declare VIP football tickets

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Source: Politics

A few weeks ago, the prime minister shocked even his own ministers by slashing the UK’s already depleted aid budget to just 0.3% of gross national income (GNI); far short of the 0.7% his party campaigned on. In protest, his international development minister Anneliese Dodds resigned. Today we have seen those cuts exacerbated and cemented in the chancellor’s spring statement, alongside a reduction to welfare that looks akin to the austerity we were promised was a thing of the past. It would appear the government has chosen those with the fewest resources – both in the UK and overseas – to shoulder the burden of its efforts to balance the books.

The Labour government took office on the promise of ‘change’, with a manifesto committed to building fairer societies. The prime minister declared ‘Britain is back’, signalling what many hoped would be a revived era of global leadership on issues of social justice and equality, and strengthened relationships with the world. Yet this vision is now in tatters.

Whether it’s austerity or aid cuts, evidence shows that cuts to public spending impact women and girls first and worst. As the global rollback on women’s rights advances at pace, what the government decides to do next with its aid budget could shape the future for women, whole societies, and our world, for decades to come.

Following the cuts in 2021, research from CARE International UK found very few safeguards had been put in place to avoid a disproportionate impact on vital programming for women and girls in crisis. While the Overseas Development Aid (ODA) budget was cut by a third, between 2021 and 2022, programming to prevent violence against women and girls fell by 41% and funding to women’s rights organisations fell 66% from its peak in 2017.

In fact, while the UK has a proud legacy of championing the rights of women and girls, new data analysis shows that funding for gender equality already stands at its joint lowest on record – almost half what it was pre-pandemic.

Running in parallel to these cuts, we’ve seen a surge in powerful and well-funded anti-gender movements and anti-rights actors who have successfully curbed and cut back women’s rights on numerous fronts – education, sexual and reproductive health and basic civil liberties, to name a few.

What this looks like, in reality, is women banned from speaking in public in Afghanistan, rising sexual violence against women in Sudan, and 140 women and girls killed every day in 2023 by a partner or close relative.

That’s why we’re calling on the government to protect women and girls, by reversing the cuts and ensuring that at least 20% of UK aid has gender equality as the main objective.

The previous government pledged that at least 80% of ODA programmes would have a focus on gender equality, but much of this target is met through ‘gender mainstreaming’ – where the needs of women and girls are considered in decision-making but are not the primary goal of the programme. Our limited ODA could be part of the solution, but unless more funding explicitly tackles the root causes of gender inequality it risks acting as a sticking plaster, not a sustainable solution.

It may sound like splitting hairs, but in the wake of monumental aid cuts – this matters. Only by setting this new target can we truly protect programming that specifically meets the needs of women and girls – to prevent gender-based violence, support girls’ education, or access to sexual and reproductive rights. History has taught us that without this ringfencing, it’s these programmes that are hit first and worst. And when these programmes are lost – they rarely return.

Women globally continue to bear the brunt of decisions made by men. But gender equality isn’t just a women’s issue – it concerns everyone. There is evidence in abundance that when women thrive, communities and economies prosper, and societies become more peaceful. Attacking women’s rights leads to the erosion of universal rights. It’s in everyone’s interest, including men and boys, and the British government’s, to ensure that today’s decisions don’t cause irreparable harm.

And we know that the British public back this, too. New polling by More in Common, commissioned by CARE, shows that that the overwhelming majority – 86% – think it’s important for the British government and politicians to stand up for women and girls across the world. And almost two thirds, 65%, agree it’s important that the UK aid budget is used to protect women and girls’ rights, with only 8% believing it’s not important at all.

The world has changed immeasurably since the prime minister took office last year. But with rapidly evolving global dynamics, the government should look to adopt a fairer and more flexible approach to fiscal rules, rather than clinging to rigid policies that continue to harm those most in need, in the UK and the world. At a minimum, this should start by protecting women and girls with the aid budget.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

The Independent Alliance, a parliamentary faction of progressive, pro-Palestinian MPs, has issued a scathing statement condemning the government’s spring statement. 

The group, of which Jeremy Corbyn is the most senior member, accuses the chancellor of going “further than even the Tories ever dared”.

The statement reads: “After 14 years of Conservative rule, we were told that austerity was over. That was a lie.”

Speaking in the House of Commons on Wednesday afternoon, Rachel Reeves confirmed deep cuts to welfare and public services, along with billions of pounds in long-term investment aimed at growing the economy.

The chancellor said her measures would ensure a predicted £4.1 billion hole in the public finances within five years would be turned into a £9.9 billion surplus.

Last week, the government announced large cuts to the benefits system, insisting they would save £5 billion by 2030. But the chancellor was forced to go further in the spring statement after the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the fiscal watchdog, rejected the government’s estimate as to how much money the reforms would save. 

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The OBR found the package would only save £3.4 billion, rather than the £5 billion the government hoped. After the further cuts, the watchdog said savings will now be £4.8 billion.

Addressing MPs, Reeves announced a freeze on the health element of universal credit for new claimants until 2030, after an initial cut of 50 per cent.

The other changes announced last week include tightening the eligibility criteria for Personal Independence Payments (PIP) and scrapping the controversial work capability assessment.

Responding, the Independent Alliance argued the government “has not just refused to undo the suffering the Tories have inflicted. They have gone even further than the Tories ever dared.”

It said: “These cruel cuts are not just robbing the most vulnerable people of security. They are robbing them of dignity – and the government should be ashamed of the hateful rhetoric they have fuelled.

“People with disabilities are not a cost to society. They are creators, performers, artists, teachers and campaigners – and they are being dehumanised by a heartless government, one broken pledge at a time.

“The government says there isn’t any money to help people. We don’t believe them. Having just announced an enormous increase in military spending, the government should be honest about what they really mean: no money for the poor, endless money for war.

“There is an alternative: tax the super-rich to fix our public services and empower those in need. Instead of going after the most vulnerable in society, let’s “crack down” on corporations, billionaires and tax evaders hoarding this nation’s wealth.

“Austerity is not a tough choice. It’s the wrong choice. The right choice is redistributing wealth and power to bring about a more equal and caring society for all.”

Alongside Corbyn, the former Labour leader, the other members of the Independent Alliance include Shockat Adam, who defeated former Labour frontbencher Jonathan Ashworth in Leicester South last July, as well as Ayoub Khan, Adnan Hussain and Iqbal Mohamed, who all also stood on pro-Palestinian platforms.

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

Rachel Reeves has presented her first highly-anticipated spring statement to the House of Commons.

Addressing MPs, the chancellor announced that the Office for Budget Responsibility’s economic growth forecast for 2025 has been slashed from 2 per cent to 1 per cent, although GDP growth forecasts for future years have been upgraded.

Read Reeves’ full statement below. 

This Labour Government were elected to bring change to our country, to provide security for working people and to deliver a decade of national renewal. That work began in July, and I am proud of what we have delivered in just nine months: restoring stability to our public finances, giving the Bank of England the foundation to cut interest rates three times since the general election, rebuilding our public services, with record investment in our NHS bringing waiting lists down for five months in a row, and increasing the national living wage to give 3 million people a pay rise from next week.

Now our task is to secure Britain’s future in a world that is changing before our eyes. The threat facing our continent was transformed when Putin invaded Ukraine. It has since escalated further and continues to evolve rapidly. At the same time, the global economy has become more uncertain, bringing insecurity at home as trading patterns become more unstable and borrowing costs rise for many major economies. The job of a responsible Government is not simply to watch this change. This moment demands an active Government—a Government not stepping back but stepping up, a Government on the side of working people helping Britain reach its potential. We have the strengths to do just that as one of the world’s largest economies, an ally to trading partners across the globe, and a hub for global innovation. These strengths and the progress we have made so far mean that we can act quickly and decisively in a more uncertain world to secure Britain’s future and to deliver prosperity for working people.

As I set out at the Budget last year, I am today returning to the House to provide an update on our public finances, supported by a new forecast from the independent Office for Budget Responsibility, ahead of a full spending review in June. I will then return to the House in the autumn to deliver a Budget in line with our commitment to deliver just one major fiscal event a year.

Let me now turn to the OBR’s forecasts; I want to thank Richard Hughes and his team for their dedicated work. The increased global uncertainty has had two consequences: first on our public finances and secondly on our economy. I will take each in turn.

In the autumn, I set out our new fiscal rules that would guide this Government. These fiscal rules are non-negotiable. They are the embodiment of this Government’s unwavering commitment to bring stability to our economy and to ensure security for working people, because the British people have seen what happens when a Government borrow beyond their means. The mini-Budget delivered by the Conservatives resulted in higher bills, higher rents and higher mortgages, and it was not the wealthy who suffered most when they crashed the economy; it was ordinary working people. They continue to feel the effects two and a half years later of the damage that the Conservatives did.

Let me be clear: there is nothing progressive, there is nothing Labour, about working people paying the price for economic irresponsibility. The British people put their trust in this Labour Government because they knew that we—they knew that I—would never take risks with the public finances and would never do anything to put household finances in danger. We must earn that trust every single day.

I set out two rules at the Budget. The first was our stability rule, which ensures that public spending is under control, balancing the current budget by 2029-30 so that day-to-day spending is met by tax receipts. The second was our investment rule to drive growth in the economy, ensuring that net financial debt falls by the end of the forecast period, while enabling us to invest alongside business.

Turning first to the stability rule, the OBR’s forecast shows that before the steps that I will take in this statement, the current budget would have been in deficit by £4.1 billion in 2029-30, having been projected to be in surplus by £9.9 billion in the autumn, as the UK, alongside our international peers like France and Germany, has seen the cost of borrowing rise during this period of heightened uncertainty in global markets. As a result of the steps that I am taking today, I can confirm that I have restored in full our headroom against the stability rule, moving from a deficit of £36.1 billion in 2025-26 and £13.4 billion in 2026-27 to a surplus of £6 billion in 2027-28, £7.1 billion in 2028-29 and £9.9 billion in 2029-30. That compares with the headroom left by the previous Government of just £6.5 billion. That means that we are continuing to meet the stability rule two years early, building resilience to shocks in this, a more uncertain world.

The OBR forecast that the investment rule would also be met two years early, with net financial debt of 82.9% of GDP in ’25-26 and 83.5% in ’26-27, before falling to 83.4% in ’27-28, to 83.2% in 2028-29 and then to 82.7% in 2029-30, providing headroom of £15.1 billion in the final year of the forecast, broadly unchanged from the autumn forecast.

After the last Government doubled the national debt—[Interruption.] After they doubled the national debt, debt interest payments now stand at £105.2 billion this year. That is more than we allocate to defence, the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice combined. That is the legacy of the Conservative party. The responsible choice is to reduce our levels of debt and borrowing in the years ahead, so that we can spend more on the priorities of working people, and that is exactly what this Government will do. I said that our fiscal rules were non-negotiable and I meant it. I will always deliver economic stability and I will always put working people first. I said it at the election; I said it at the Budget; and I say it again today.

Let me now set out the steps that the Government have taken. At the Budget we protected working people by keeping our promise not to raise their rates of national insurance, income tax or VAT. At the same time, we began to rebuild our public services after the Conservatives left a £22 billion black hole in our public finances. Ours were the right choices: the right choices for stability and the right choices for renewal, funded by the decisions that we took on tax.

As I promised in the autumn, this statement does not contain any further tax increases, but when working people are paying their taxes while still struggling with the cost of living, it cannot be right that others are still evading what they rightly owe in tax. In the Budget, I delivered the most ambitious package of measures we have ever seen to cut down on tax evasion, raising £6.5 billion per year by the end of the forecast. Today I go further, continuing our investment in cutting-edge technology, investing in HMRC’s capacity to crack down on tax avoidance, and setting out plans to increase the number of tax fraudsters charged every year by 20%. These changes raise a further £1 billion, taking the total revenue raised from reducing tax evasion, under this Labour Government, to £7.5 billion. These figures are verified by the Office for Budget Responsibility and I to thank my hon. Friend the Exchequer Secretary for his continued work in this area.

Last week, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions set out this Government’s plans to reform the welfare system. The Labour party is the party of work: we believe that if you can work, you should work, but if you cannot work, you should be properly supported. This Government inherited a broken system: more than 1,000 people every day are qualifying for personal independence payments; one in eight young people are not in employment, education or training. If we do nothing, we are writing off an entire generation. That cannot be right and we will not stand for it. It is a waste of their potential and it is a waste of their futures, and we will change it.

As my right hon. Friend said in her statement last week, the final costings will be subject to the OBR’s assessment. Today, the OBR has said that it estimates that the package will save £4.8 billion in the welfare budget, reflecting its judgments on behavioural effects and wider factors. This also reflects final adjustments to the overall package, consistent with the Secretary of State’s statement last week and the Government’s “Pathways to Work” Green Paper.

The universal credit standard allowance will increase from £92 per week in 2025-26 to £106 per week by 2029-30, while the universal credit health element will be cut for new claimants by around 50% and then frozen.

On top of that, we are investing £1 billion to provide guaranteed, personalised employment support to help people back into work, and £400 million to support the Department for Work and Pensions and our jobcentres to deliver these changes effectively and fairly, taking total savings from the package to £3.4 billion. While spending on disability and sickness benefits will continue to rise, these plans mean that welfare spending as a share of GDP will fall between 2026 and the end of the forecast period, which is very different from what we inherited from the Conservative party. We are reforming our welfare system, making it more sustainable, protecting the most vulnerable and, most importantly, supporting more people back into secure work and lifting them out of poverty.

At the Budget, I fixed the foundations of our economy to deliver on the promise of change. That work has already begun. There are some 2 million extra appointments in our NHS; waiting lists are down; new breakfast clubs are opening across England; there have been the largest settlements in real terms for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in the history of devolution; and asylum costs are falling—promises made, and promises kept, and every single one of them was opposed by Opposition parties.

At the Budget, alongside providing an increase in funding for this year and next, I set the envelope for the spending review, which we will deliver in June, led by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. That will set departmental budgets until 2028-29 for day-to-day spending, and until 2029-30 for capital spending.

Today’s statement reflects two steps that we have taken on our spending plans. First, because we are living in an uncertain world, as the Prime Minister has set out, we will increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and reduce overseas aid to 0.3% of gross national income. That means that we save £2.6 billion in day-to-day spending in 2029-30 to fund our more capital-intensive defence commitments. Secondly, in recent months, we have begun to fundamentally reform the British state, driving efficiency and productivity across Government to deliver tangible savings and improve services across our country.

Earlier this month, the Prime Minister set out our plans to abolish the arm’s length body NHS England, and to ensure that money goes directly to improving the service for patients. The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is driving forward vital reforms to increase NHS productivity, and is bearing down on costly agency spend to save money so that we can improve patient care.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is taking forward work to reduce the cost of running Government significantly—by 15%. That will be worth £2 billion by the end of the decade. This work shows that we can make our state leaner and more agile, and deliver more resources to the frontline, while ensuring that we control day-to-day spending to meet our fiscal rules.

Today, I build on that work by bringing forward £3.25 billion of investment to deliver the reforms that our public services need through a new transformation fund. That is money brought forward now to bring down the cost of running Government by the end of the forecast period by making public services more efficient, more productive and more focused on the user. I can confirm today the first allocations from this fund, including funding for voluntary exit schemes to reduce the size of the civil service, and for pioneering artificial intelligence tools to modernise the state; investment in technology for the Ministry of Justice to deliver probation services more effectively; and up-front investment so that we can support more children in foster care, to give them the best possible start in life and reduce cost pressures in the future.

Our work to make Government leaner, more productive and more efficient will help deliver a further £3.5 billion of day-to-day savings by 2029-30. Overall, day-to-day spending will be reduced by £6.1 billion by 2029-30, and it will now grow by an average of 1.2% a year above inflation; for comparison, in the autumn, that figure was 1.3%. I can confirm to the House that day-to-day spending will increase in real terms above inflation in every single year of the forecast. In the spending review, apart from the reductions in overseas aid, day-to-day spending across Government has been fully protected.

I can also confirm our approach to capital investment. In the autumn Budget, I announced £100 billion of additional capital spending to crowd in investment from the private sector, in order to fix our crumbling infrastructure and create jobs in every corner of our country. Today, I am not cutting capital spending, as the Conservative party did time and again, because that choked off growth and left our school roofs literally crumbling. That was the wrong choice. It was the irresponsible choice. It was the Tory choice. Today, I am instead increasing capital spending by an average of £2 billion per year, compared with in the autumn, to drive growth in our economy and to deliver in full our vital commitments on defence. This Government will ensure that every pound we spend will deliver for the British people by increasing productivity, driving growth in our economy and improving our frontline public services.

Let me turn to the impact of increased uncertainty on our economy. To deliver economic stability, we must work closely with the Bank of England, supporting the independent Monetary Policy Committee to meet the 2% inflation target. There have been three interest rate cuts since the general election, and today’s data shows that inflation fell in February, having peaked at 11% under the previous Government. The Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts that consumer prices index inflation will average 3.2% this year, before falling rapidly to 2.1% in 2026 and meeting the 2% target from 2027 onwards, giving families and businesses the security that they need, and providing our economy with the stable platform that it needs to grow.

Earlier this month, the OECD downgraded this year’s growth forecast for every G7 economy, including the UK, and the OBR has today revised down our growth forecast for 2025 from 2% in the autumn to 1% today. I am not satisfied with these numbers. We Labour Members are serious about taking the action needed to grow our economy; we are backing the builders, not the blockers, with a third runway at Heathrow airport and through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. We are increasing investment with reforms to our pension system and a new national wealth fund, and tearing down regulatory barriers in every sector of our economy. That is a serious plan for growth. That is a serious plan to improve living standards. That is a serious plan to renew our country.

A changing world presents challenges, but also opportunities for new jobs and new contracts in our world-class defence industrial centres from Belfast to Deeside, and from Plymouth to Rosyth. In February, the Prime Minister set out our Government’s commitment to increasing spending on defence to 2.5% of GDP from April 2027—the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the cold war—and an ambition to spend 3% of GDP on defence in the next Parliament. That was the right decision in a more insecure world—we are putting an extra £6.4 billion into defence spending by 2027—but we have to move quickly in this changing world, and that starts with investment. Today, I can confirm that I will provide an additional £2.2 billion for the Ministry of Defence in the next financial year—a further down payment on our plan to deliver 2.5% of GDP by 2027. This additional investment is about increasing not just our national security, but our economic security.

As defence spending rises, I want the whole country to feel its benefits, so I will now set out the immediate steps that we are taking to boost Britain’s defence industry, and to make the UK a defence industrial superpower. We will spend a minimum of 10% of the Ministry of Defence’s equipment budget on new, novel technologies, including drones and artificial intelligence-enabled technology, driving forward advanced manufacturing production in places like Glasgow, Derby and Newport, creating demand for highly skilled engineers and scientists, and delivering new business opportunities for UK tech firms and start-ups. We will establish a protected budget of £400 million in the Ministry of Defence—a budget that will rise over time—for UK defence innovation, and a clear mandate to bring innovative technology to the frontline at speed.

We will reform our broken defence procurement system, making it quicker, more agile and more streamlined, and giving small businesses across the UK better access to Ministry of Defence contracts—something welcomed by the Federation of Small Businesses. We will take forward our plan for Barrow, a town at the heart of our nuclear security, working with my hon. Friend the Member for Barrow and Furness (Michelle Scrogham). We are providing £200 million to support the creation of thousands of jobs there. We will regenerate Portsmouth naval base, securing its future, as called for by my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan). We will secure better homes for thousands of military families—the homes that they deserve, which were denied to them by the previous Government—in the constituencies of my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth Moor View (Fred Thomas), for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard) and for York Outer (Mr Charters) and in Aldershot. That is the difference that this Labour Government are making.

Finally, we will provide £2 billion of increased capacity for UK Export Finance to provide loans for overseas buyers of UK defence goods and services. I want to do more with our defence budget, so that we can buy, make and sell things here in Britain. I want to give our world-leading defence companies and those who work in them further opportunities to grow, and to create jobs in Britain, as military spending rightly increases all across Europe. To oversee all this vital work, my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary and I will establish a new defence growth board to maximise the benefits from every pound of taxpayers’ money that we spend, and we will put defence at the heart of our modern industrial strategy to drive innovation, which can deliver huge benefits for the British economy. That is how we make our country a defence industrial superpower, so that the skills, jobs and opportunities of the future can be found right here in the United Kingdom.

As the previous Government learned to their detriment, there are no shortcuts to economic growth. It will take long-term decisions. It will take our putting in the hard yards. It will take time for the effect of the reforms that we are introducing to be felt in the everyday economy. It is right that the Office for Budget Responsibility should consider the evidence and look carefully at measures before recognising a growth impact in its forecast, but I can announce to the House that the OBR has considered and has scored one of the central planks of our plan for growth.

In my first week as Chancellor, I announced that we were pursuing the most ambitious set of planning reforms in decades to get Britain building again, and in December we published changes to the national planning policy framework, driven forward tirelessly by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister. We are reintroducing mandatory housing targets, and bringing grey-belt land into scope. The OBR has today concluded that these reforms will permanently increase the level of real GDP by 0.2% in ’29-30—an additional £6.8 billion for our economy—and by 0.4% of GDP within 10 years, which is an additional £15.1 billion in the British economy. That is the biggest positive growth impact that the OBR has ever reflected in its forecast, for a policy with no fiscal cost. Taken together with our plans to increase capital spending, which we set out in the Budget last year, this Government’s policies will increase the level of real GDP by 0.6% in the next 10 years. That is the difference that this Labour Government are making.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

A cabinet minister has appeared to confirm reports that further cuts to welfare spending are in the pipeline after the budget watchdog ruled previously-announced measures will not save the £5 billion a year expected by 2030.

According to multiple reports on Wednesday morning, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) found that the measures would only cut the welfare bill by £3.4 billion, with Rachel Reeves now expected to announce further measures to save a further £500 million.

John Healey, the defence secretary, told Times Radio: “That’s a calculation we may see confirmed by the Office for Budget Responsibility about the longer-term savings that our plans to change the welfare system may bring.

“That’s a must-do for any responsible government, particularly one that believes in the importance of our social security system.”

Healey added: “You can’t have a benefits system that is failing people and out of control in this way.

“That’s why the plans that [work and pensions secretary] Liz Kendall laid out last week, and that you’ll hear more from the chancellor this afternoon in the spring statement, are so important.

“We want the social security system to work. It’s got to be there to support the poorest, but it’s also got to be there to make sure those who can work are able to do so.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Overall, the chancellor is expected to announce about £15 billion of savings to meet her self-imposed fiscal rules, after the OBR forced her to reopen spending plans by halving its growth forecasts. 

Speaking in the House of Commons on Wednesday afternoon, Reeves will unveil an extra £2.2 billion to be spent on the UK’s defence over the next year.

Reeves will say the UK must “move quickly in a changing world” to up its defence commitment. The extra funding is being put on the table as the government aims to hike defence spending to 2.5 per cent of the UK’s economic output by 2027.

Reeves will insist this plan, set out by the prime minister in February, was the “right decision in a more insecure world”, adding: “But we have to move quickly in a changing world. And that starts with investment.”

“This increase in investment is not just about increasing our national security but increasing our economic security, too. As defence spending rises, I want the whole country to feel the benefits”, the chancellor is expected to tell MPs.

The April funding increase will help pay for new technologies, like long range laser and microwave weapons — collectively known as directed energy weapons — which will be fitted to warships.

Commenting on this announcement, Healey said national security was “the bedrock of a successful economy”.

“This significant increase in defence spending, on top of the £2.9 billion announced by the Chancellor at the Budget, means an extra £5 billion for our Armed Forces next financial year”, he said.

Healey added: “This investment will make Britain stronger and safer in a more insecure world. And it will ensure defence is an engine for growth, creating good jobs across the nation.

“These are the bold first steps of the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War announced by the prime minister last month.

“Our government is delivering for defence and investing in the outstanding men and women who keep Britain secure at home and strong abroad.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Source: Politics

Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary, delivered a statement in the House of Commons on Monday concerning the closure of Heathrow Airport late last week, as a result of a power cut caused by a fire at a nearby electrical substation.

Alexander, who had that morning toured the broadcast studios touting Labour’s pothole crackdown, reflected on the “unprecedented event” and restated the government’s commitment to learning “any and all lessons we can to make sure it doesn’t happen again in future.”

Heathrow’s decision to shut down its operations was not a result of a single point of failure, Alexander relayed. She added: “The feed from North Hyde substation is one of three supply points to Heathrow, and the fire caused exceptional damage that took the whole substation out of service.

“The other supply points continued supplying to Heathrow airport throughout the incident.

“Heathrow’s view was this supply was insufficient to ensure the safe and secure ongoing operation of all systems across the whole airport.”

With no obvious dividing line between the two main parties on the issue, the Conservative frontbench engaged constructively with the substance of Alexander’s statement. No pointed objections were voiced; only productive questions. “I am grateful to the honourable gentleman [Gareth Bacon] for the tone of his comments”, the transport secretary responded.

This exchange reflected the tenor of the ensuing debate, as MPs from the Liberal Democrats — and even SNP, DUP and UUP — took turns putting their party’s concerns on the record.

The Reform UK parliamentary grouping was, however, conspicuously absent. Independent MP Rupert Lowe, once the party’s most enthusiastic parliamentarian, watched on from his new commons perch behind the Reform bench (he did not attempt to catch the speaker’s eye).

Reform UK was nonetheless referenced by Alexander in a politically charged aside — the statement’s sole contribution to news. It came as Conservative MP Sir Edward Leigh, a parliamentarian on the right of his party, echoed Reform’s apparent line on the Heathrow shutdown. The father of the House asked for the transport secretary’s assurance that “nothing in our drive towards green energy and net zero will ever affect the sustainability and safety of our vital transport systems.”

Alexander responded in the affirmative, adding: “I am aware that some other members of this House — not present in the chamber today — were busy peddling some mythson Friday morning about this issue.

“It is clear to me that Heathrow’s back-up power supplies consist of both diesel and electricity generators. No matter what some other members might be saying, those systems did work.”

For while neither deputy leader Richard Tice nor Nigel Farage addressed the commons on Monday, Reform’s chief spokespeople had spent the weekend blaming the shutdown on Heathrow’s “drive to net zero.”

In an interview with GB News on Friday, Tice boasted of exclusive insider industry knowledge, courtesy of conversations with an aviation expert, who had told him that Heathrow’s move from diesel back-up generators to biomass had left the airport vulnerable.

Tice declared: “It appears that Heathrow had changed its backup systems in order to be, wait for it… net zero compliant.”

He added: “Critical infrastructure like that obviously requires a back-up. Having spoken to an industry expert, it appears that Heathrow had changed its back-up systems in order for it to be net zero compliant. And therefore they had got rid of their diesel generators and have moved towards a biomass generator that was designed not to completely replace the grid but work alongside the grid.

“Basically, their net zero compliant back-up system had completely failed in its core function at the first time of asking. It beggars belief.”

In an additional comment to the Telegraph, laden with question marks, Tice said: “Why is Heathrow being so silent about this? Are they embarrassed because they have something to hide? Is it because their net zero backup failed at the first time of asking, and they daren’t admit it? It just shows the lunacy of net ‘stupid’ zero.”

Farage later expanded on Tice’s logic. In a post to X Sunday, he asserted: “Heathrow Airport had no diesel generator backup. It was removed as part of their drive to net zero.

“Dubai Airport and many military bases do have diesel generators and their aircraft would have continued flying.

“The truth about this disaster is being withheld.”

The replies to Farage’s post, which received 32,000 likes, are replete with users accusing the Reform leader of spreading fake news. One disbelieving account referenced an official Heathrow statement, which reads: “We have multiple sources of energy into Heathrow. But when a source is interrupted, we have backup diesel generators and uninterruptable power supplies in place, and they all operate as expected.”

That may well explain why Reform’s war on woke generators did not advance into the commons on Monday — leaving Alexander to deliver her rebuke in response to a similarly-minded Conservative MP.

Crucially, this is not the first manifestation of the Faragist instinct to decry “conspiracy” in order to grab a headline at the onset of some unexpected development.

The Reform UK leader used the exact same turn of phrase — “the truth is being withheld” — in his initial response to the Southport murders last year. In a video posted to social media before the eruption of far-right rioting, Farage commented: “I just wonder whether the truth is being withheld from us. I don’t know the answer to that, but I think it is a fair and legitimate question”.

Later, in a combative interview with LBC Radio, Farage appeared to excuse his initial response to the tragedy as having been influenced by misinformation. The Reform leader had himself been misled by “stories online from some very prominent folks with big followings” — individuals like internet misogynist Andrew Tate.

But in January, Farage backtracked on his partial backtrack, insisting that his initial question-asking exercise was vindicated by post-facto revelations about the identity of the Southport killer.

Reform, then, has already performed the just asking questions routine to shape political narratives and secure headlines this parliament. Farage’s pseudoskepticism, cloaked in the language of critical thinking, is a political tactic that affords Reform plausible deniability — while channelling the seized attention of the public to the party’s attack lines.

Farage’s commentary comes, of course, as more mainstream actors see reason for pause after a distressing development. That creates a political-media vacuum that Reform is uniquely positioned to fill.

Political commentator John Oxley voiced this view in a post to BlueSky on Monday. “This nudge wink conspiracism [has] become a strategy of Reform”, he argued. “[It] appeals to their more radically online voters, while offering plausible deniability about what you are implying — and then you can claim any subsequent discovery vindicates you. [It was] honed around Southport.”

As Oxley suggests, the approach reflects an emergent playbook. It is the nature of the political cycle — and especially the social media ecosystem in which Reform operates — that Alexander’s “myth”-busting exercise receives rather less coverage than the inciting claim.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Senior Conservative MP suggests Donald Trump is a ‘Manchurian Candidate’

Lunchtime soundbite

‘I think in any other field she would have. But she’s actually one of the best that they’ve they’ve got, which is what’s really sad.

If she goes, we’re likely to get someone much worse. You listen to labour backbenchers, and a lot of the things that they ask for are crazy, they would bankrupt the country tomorrow.’

—  Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch is asked whether the chancellor should be fired on TalkTV.

Now try this…

‘The Trump administration accidentally texted me its war plans’
Extraordinary piece from Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, which has to be read to be believed.

‘Reeves to put £2bn into affordable housing to “sweeten the pill” of cuts’
Via the Guardian.

‘UK chancellor will double down despite growing opposition’
It’s a fiscal gamble, but for now, Reeves will continue to argue there’s no other way than to take the bet she’s making, writes Mujtaba Rahman for Politico. (Paywall)

On this day in 2024:

Government accused of being ‘weak’ and ‘naive’ on China by Conservative critics

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Source: Politics