Rachel Reeves will announce almost £3bn more from the armed forces in the budget, the Telegraph is reporting. In their story Nick Gutteridge and Danielle Sheridan say:
[The chancellor’s] decision will end fears that defence will bear the brunt of the “difficult decisions” she says are needed to fix the public finances. It will mean the proportion of national wealth spent on the military will decline slightly but remain roughly stable at 2.3 per cent of GDP.
Part of the extra cash is expected to be used to cover the £400 million a year cost of giving soldiers a six per cent pay rise, backdated to April.
The money will also fund the purchase of weapons to replenish stockpiles that have been depleted by arms supplies to Ukraine …
It is understood the £2.9 billion injection will be a one-off while the government conducts a wider review into future defence spending.
In his First Edition newsletter, Archie Bland compares Labour’s pre- and post-election promises with what we are expecting to get from the budget today. He quotes Richard Partington, the Guardian’s economics correspondent, as saying that, although it will be a tax-raising budget, it will also be “a budget that protects large swathes of what Labour has loosely defined as working people”.
Good morning. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, will today seek to reset the trajectory of public spending and taxation for the rest of this parliament – perhaps for a decade, based on Labour’s pre-election rhetoric – with what is expected to be the biggest tax-raising budget in history, at least in cash terms. Larry Elliott and Pippa Crerar preview it here, in our overnight story.
In recent years budgets have become two-week news events, with many of the main measures being covertly, or overtly, announced in advanced by the Treasury, instead of being unbundled as a surprise in the hour-long Commons statement. This year that has been happening even more than usual, to the extent that government insiders are saying that there will be no surprises in the speech this afternoon. That means that Reeves won’t use her last two minutes to unveil an out-of-the-blue tax cut or spending bonanza destined to grab the news headlines; it doesn’t mean that there won’t be plenty of interesting news in the budget, and things we did not know. With most of the big announcements, we have a broad indication of what’s coming, but not the detail.
A ‘no surprise’ budget is very Keir Starmer (there were no surprises in the manifesto, or the king’s speech either – Starmer is more interested in governing than in media manipulation) and this means there should be no risk of the financial markets panicking (Liz Truss-style) because they have been caught unawares. But the tactic can backfire. George Osborne wanted the story of his 2012 budget to be his decision to cut the top rate of income tax, but that was leaked in advance and so on the day and afterwards the media focused instead on matters like the pasty tax, which led to the budget being seen as an omnishambles.
In comments about the budget released overnight by the Treasury, Reeves says:
My belief in Britain burns brighter than ever. And the prize on offer to today is immense.
More pounds in people’s pockets. An NHS that is there when you need it. An economy that is growing, creating wealth and opportunity for all. Because that is the only way to improve living standards.
And the only way to drive economic growth is to invest, invest, invest. There are no shortcuts. To deliver that investment we must restore economic stability.
The reference to “more pounds in people’s pockets” has had some commentators scratching their heads, because this is not a giveaway budget, but perhaps that is best understood by the reference in the previous sentence to “the prize on offer”; she is talking about what the budget might deliver in the years ahead, not tomorrow. But the minimum wage announcement will put more pounds in some people’s pockets.
The Treasury is also saying the budget will end austerity. In its overnight press release, it says:
[Reeves] will make clear that this budget rejects austerity, instead prioritising economic stability, investment and reform. The budget will ensure funding to cut hospital waiting lists, unlock affordable homes and new investment to rebuild schools. Meanwhile, working people won’t face higher taxes in their payslips in line with the manifesto commitment not to increase taxes on income tax, VAT or employee national insurance.
The chancellor will reflect on the tough decisions she has had to make to restore economic stability, on spending and welfare by cracking down on fraud, tax avoidance and waste, and making sure every penny of taxpayer money is spent wisely.
This is a rewrite of the Labour manifesto, which promised no increase in national insurance, and did not specify that the pledge only applied to employees’ national insurance. Labour claims this was implicit in the pledge because the manifesto talked about not raising taxes for workers. There will be an argument today about whether this is outright dishonesty and a broken promise, or standard political slipperiness, because employers’ national insurance is due to rise by a lot. But even if people do view this as a broken promise, the impact may be limited. Voters are willing to accept broken promises when they believe the decision involved is the right one.
Today we will be focusing almost exclusively on the budget. But there will be full coverage of PMQs, Rishi Sunak’s last as Tory leader. I’m Andrew Sparrow, and I am writing the blog this morning, but later Graeme Wearden, who normally writes the business live blog, will be joining for the budget coverage.
Here is the timetable for the day.
9am: Keir Starmer chairs a budget cabinet, where Rachel Reeves will brief colleagues (or at least those who have not been following the news for the past fortnight) on what will be in the budget.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Rishi Sunak at PMQs.
12.30pm: Rachel Reeves delivers the budget.
2.30pm: Richard Hughes, chair of the Office for Budget Responsibility, holds a press conference about the budget and the OBR’s analysis of it.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line (BTL) or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. I’m still using X and I’ll see something addressed to @AndrewSparrow very quickly. I’m also trying Bluesky (@andrewsparrowgdn) and Threads (@andrewsparrowtheguardian).
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos (no error is too small to correct). And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Source: theguardian.com
