logo
Chris Mason: Reeves's spending priorities leave little wiggle room

Chris Mason: Reeves's spending priorities leave little wiggle room

BBC News10-06-2025
The words Spending Review may not instantly quicken the heart rate of many, but what we hear from the Chancellor Rachel Reeves will have an impact on what your life is like in the UK in the coming years.It could be one of the defining moments between now and the next general election, as the government divvies up spending for the health service, defence, schools, the police, prisons, courts and much else.After plenty of words about the government's priorities, we will get a sense of the numbers. And yes, a sense of the winners and losers.We can expect ministers to claim that much of what it has done in its first year in office has been about "fixing the foundations".That is code for the tricky stuff: think those big and in many places unpopular tax rises, such as the increase in employers national insurance contributions.
There is also a keen awareness that rarely has a new government suffered such a big whack to its popularity so fast. Yes a whopping majority, but just 34% of the vote last summer, and they have gone a long way backwards since.Little wonder we can expect the chancellor to claim "this government is renewing Britain" but also acknowledge "I know too many people in too many parts of the country are yet to feel it".Baked into what we can expect to hear is an emphasis from Reeves of the importance of stability.As an illustration of that, the chancellor recently returned from a meeting of G7 finance ministers in Canada, where she, not yet a year in office, was the second longest serving attendee around the table. It is a volatile world.As the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and others have pointed out, the key decision above all others that we await in the Spending Review is how much money is allocated to the health service.The NHS makes up such a big chunk of day-to-day government spending - about 40% - that how well or otherwise it does shapes everything else.This has long been the case, particularly because it is often also gets a proportionately more generous settlement than others.And, on top of that, what has changed more recently as well the government's desire to spend more on defence too and to do so in an era of low growth.
'A song to sing'
If we put all these things together, you have an explanation for why other budgets will be squeezed.Or, as Paul Johnson, the outgoing director of the IFS puts it, "this will be one of the tightest spending reviews in modern times, outside of the austerity period of the early 2010s".For much of the last week, the government has been leaning into the elements of its plan that it feels most comfortable selling: the long term, so-called capital spending on transport and nuclear power.What gets squeezed and by how much is the detail we are waiting for.Labour MPs have been invited in to see the chancellor and be talked through the plans.The aim, as one person put it to me, was to give them "a song to sing", things they can talk about when they are asked what the government is up to.Plenty of Labour MPs I talk to welcome the long-term spending but are also acutely conscious of how bumpy politics feels right now and how important it is they are seen to deliver and deliver quickly."The problem with talk of 'a decade of national renewal' is so much of this stuff is long term and so we could get half way through the decade and then lose the election," one MP reflects.Folk in the Treasury are aware of this critique and particularly those who might point to some squeezed day-to-day budgets and claim we are experiencing what they see as austerity.It has led those around Reeves to declare a "war on graphs" or, as Laura Kuenssberg reported the other day, a desire to point to graphs that help illustrate a key part of their argument in taking on this criticism.They point out that when you combine day-to-day spending with capital spending, the graph is going up - the opposite of what some might describe as austerity."This is about four trillion pounds of spending," one senior figure tells me. "We reset the foundations. This is stage two: setting things out. Then, we hope for the delivery."Let's see.The political and economic backdrop is perilous: an electorate without much patience, limited economic growth and a wildly unpredictable international landscape, not least President Trump.Given what the government has chosen to prioritise - the NHS and defence - and the rules it has set itself with the aim of projecting economic competence, it leaves the chancellor with little room for manoeuvre.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Sturgeon: ‘Witch-hunt' MSPs investigating me were being directed by Salmond
Sturgeon: ‘Witch-hunt' MSPs investigating me were being directed by Salmond

The Independent

time16 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Sturgeon: ‘Witch-hunt' MSPs investigating me were being directed by Salmond

Nicola Sturgeon has said she believes some MSPs who investigated the Scottish Government's handling of sexual harassment allegations against Alex Salmond were 'taking direction' from him. The former Scotland first minister wrote in her autobiography, Frankly, that she thought either Mr Salmond or his allies were guiding some opposition MSPs on what to ask her. She accused her opponents in the special Holyrood committee of a 'witch-hunt' against her. The committee ultimately found Ms Sturgeon misled the Scottish Parliament over the Salmond inquiry. However, she said the probe that 'really mattered' was the independent investigation by senior Irish lawyer James Hamilton which cleared her of breaking the ministerial code. The former SNP leader said that while she was 'certain' she had not breached the code, 'I had been obviously deeply anxious that James Hamilton might take a different view', admitting that 'had he done so, I would have had to resign'. She said that she felt 'on trial' as part of a wider phenomenon that when men were accused of impropriety, 'some people's first instinct is to find a woman to blame'. Ms Sturgeon did admit to 'misplaced trust and poor judgment' in her autobiography, which was published early by Waterstones on Monday, having been slated for release this Thursday. She wrote: 'This feeling of being on trial was most intense when it came to the work of the Scottish Parliament committee set up to investigate the Scottish government's handling of the original complaints against Alex. 'From day one, it seemed clear that some of the opposition members of the committee were much less interested in establishing facts, or making sure lessons were learned, than they were in finding some way to blame it all on me. 'If it sometimes felt to me like a 'witch-hunt', it is probably because for some of them that is exactly what it was. 'I was told, and I believe it to be true, that some of the opposition MSPs were taking direction from Alex himself – though possibly through an intermediary – on the points to pursue and the questions to ask.' Ms Sturgeon described the inquiry, to which she gave eight hours of sworn evidence, as 'gruelling' but also 'cathartic'. MSPs voted five to four that she misled them. The politicians began their inquiry after a judicial review in 2019 found the Scottish Government's investigation into Mr Salmond's alleged misconduct was unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias. Mr Salmond, who died last year, was awarded £500,000 in legal expenses. Ms Sturgeon wrote of the inquiry: 'It also gave the significant number of people who tuned in to watch the chance to see for themselves just how partisan some of the committee members were being. 'Not surprisingly, the opposition majority on the committee managed to find some way of asserting in their report that I had breached the ministerial code. 'However, it was the verdict of the independent Hamilton report that mattered.' She said her infamous falling out with her predecessor was a 'bruising episode' of her life as she accused Mr Salmond of creating a 'conspiracy theory' to defend himself from reckoning with misconduct allegations, of which he was cleared in court. Ms Sturgeon said her former mentor was 'never able to produce a shred of hard evidence that he was' the victim of a conspiracy. She went on: 'All of which begs the question: how did he manage to persuade some people that he was the wronged party, and lead others to at least entertain the possibility? 'In short, he used all of his considerable political and media skills to divert attention from what was, for him, the inconvenient fact of the whole business. 'He sought to establish his conspiracy narrative by weaving together a number of incidents and developments, all of which had rational explanations, into something that, with his powers of persuasion, he was able to cast as sinister.' Ms Sturgeon speaks about Mr Salmond several times in her autobiography, which also has a dedicated chapter to him, simply titled 'Alex Salmond'. In it, she speaks of an 'overwhelming sense of sadness and loss' when she found out about his death, which she said hit her harder than she had anticipated. Ms Sturgeon says the breakdown in their relationship happened long before Mr Salmond's misconduct allegations. She said it had begun to deteriorate when she became first minister in 2014 following his resignation in light of the independence referendum defeat. Ms Sturgeon claims her former boss still wanted to 'call the shots' outside of Bute House and appeared unhappy that she was no longer his inferior. She also accuses him of trying to 'distort' and 'weaponise' his alleged victims' 'trauma' through his allegations of conspiracy. Ms Sturgeon claims that Mr Salmond, who later quit the SNP to form the Alba Party, would rather have seen the SNP destroyed than be successful without him. Despite her myriad claims against her predecessor, though, Ms Sturgeon said: 'Part of me still misses him, or at least the man I thought he was and the relationship we once had. 'I know I will never quite escape the shadow he casts, even in death.'

Starmer faces furious backlash to ban on Palestine Action
Starmer faces furious backlash to ban on Palestine Action

The Independent

time16 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Starmer faces furious backlash to ban on Palestine Action

Sir Keir Starmer is facing a furious backlash after the arrest of hundreds of people during a protest in support of Palestine Action, a recently proscribed organisation, on Saturday. The 532 arrests mark the highest number by the Metropolitan Police at a single protest since the 1990s, with many of those held reported to be over 60. Politicians from across the spectrum, including David Davis and Peter Hain, alongside civil liberties groups like Amnesty and Liberty, have condemned the arrests as an excessive use of counter-terrorism powers. Labour peer Shami Chakrabarti said the Palestine Action proscription 'is in danger of becoming a mistake of poll tax proportions' – a reference to Margaret Thatcher 's unpopular policy that sparked riots. The government defended the proscription, citing alleged criminal damage and targeting of Jewish-owned businesses by the group.

Manchester United fan group postpones protest against Sir Jim Ratcliffe
Manchester United fan group postpones protest against Sir Jim Ratcliffe

The Independent

time16 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Manchester United fan group postpones protest against Sir Jim Ratcliffe

A Manchester United supporters' group has postponed a demonstration against the club's ownership planned for the day of their opening game of the Premier League season. The 1958 had organised a protest march to Old Trafford on August 17, ahead of United's clash with Arsenal, with banners referring to minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe. The 1958 has overseen numerous demonstrations in recent years, principally aimed at unpopular majority shareholders the Glazers, but frustration has now spread to Ratcliffe. The billionaire British businessman, who owns a 28.94 per cent stake in United, has instigated wide – often unpopular – changes since taking over day-to-day operational control from the Glazers in February 2024. 'Jim Ratcliffe chose to get into bed with the Glazers and, in our opinion, is helping keep them in charge,' said a group representative, who added Ratcliffe was 'no saviour' and 'like a (red) devil in disguise,' last week. However, after conducting a survey, the group has acknowledged opinion is split and the time is not right for a protest. A statement read: 'With a fanbase as diverse and passionate as ours, finding the right balance isn't always easy. We've had to consider momentum, timing, fan appetite, broader consequences of protest activity whilst assessing how current and future decisions may impact us as fans. 'Given the current sentiment within the fanbase and particularly in light of these recent survey results, it's clear there is no unified view on the direction of the club under Ratcliffe. 'That split is real, and we believe it would be irresponsible to risk creating a situation that could result in any 'red on red' conflict inside or outside the stadium.' The group say almost 63 per cent of the near 26,000 respondents to their survey said Ratcliffe and his Ineos company should be held to account for their decisions so far by means of a protest. However, 68 per cent also believed they should be given more time.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store