Rachel Reeves' Spring Statement: The fallout at Westminster - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 82

News

Rachel Reeves' Spring Statement: The fallout at Westminster - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 82

21 Mar 2025

Is Rachel Reeves gearing up for a standard Spring Statement — or are we in emergency budget territory? In this episode we dig into what form next week’s parliamentary statement might take and why it may be more than just an economic update. We trace the history of the “one fiscal event” a year rule, explore the tough choices facing the Chancellor, and ask whether Parliament still has any real say over tax and spending. Plus, could post-legislative scrutiny finally be coming into its own?

LISTEN

In this episode, Ruth and Mark cut through the fiscal fog surrounding Rachel Reeves’ upcoming Spring Economic Statement — officially billed as a routine forecast update, but with growing signals it could be something much bigger. With whispers of an “emergency budget” and mounting pressure from the Office for Budget Responsibility’s (OBR) latest projections, they weigh the procedural factors that will determine whether Reeves will take action now to meet her fiscal rules, or kick the tougher decisions down the road to the autumn Budget and the Comprehensive Spending Review.

They also take a step back to explore how we got here. The current approach of having just one major fiscal event per year was introduced in 2016 by then-Chancellor Philip Hammond, aiming to bring predictability and control. But when long-term economic forecasts suggest those all-important fiscal rules are at risk — especially ones that stretch five years into the future — that system starts to show its cracks.

They also speak to Professor David Heald, who delivers a sobering assessment of how little control Parliament has over public finances — before spending takes place. He argues that the UK’s budget-setting process is executive-dominated and ripe for reform, but political incentives keep the status quo firmly in place.

Later, Ruth and Mark highlight an encouraging sign of reform: the growing use of post-legislative scrutiny, with the Football Governance Bill now including a statutory review clause. They reflect on how tools like these could support longer-term thinking in Parliament — if only they were used more systematically.

← Back to Parliament Matters homepage

Listen on our YouTube channel (captioned)

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Our guest

Professor David Heald

David Heald is Emeritus Professor and Honorary Senior Research Fellow at the Adam Smith Business School at the University of Glasgow, specialising in public sector accounting reform, public expenditure management, public audit, infrastructure financing, and financing devolved governments. Before becoming an academic, he qualified as a member of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants and worked as a management accountant in the engineering and steel industries. Among his many public roles, he is a member of HM Treasury’s User and Preparer Advisory Group on government financial reporting and a former adviser to the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee.

Resources

Professor David Heald

Personal website

Hansard Society

How does Parliament authorise the Government's taxation plans? A procedural guide to the Budget process
How does Parliament approve Government spending? A procedural guide to the Estimates process

UK Parliament

Spring Statement 2025: Background briefing, House of Commons Library

Transcript

Please note, this transcript is automatically generated. There may consequently be minor errors and the text is not formatted according to our style guide. If you wish to reference or cite the transcript copy below, please first check against the audio version above.

ntro: [00:00:00] You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard Society production, supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety.org.uk.

Ruth Fox: Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox

Mark D'Arcy: and I'm Mark D'Arcy. Coming up this week

Ruth Fox: Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Is it a spring statement or is it an emergency budget? What exactly might Rachel Reeves' big statement next week be and what might it mean?

Mark D'Arcy: Will MP's scrutiny of whatever the Chancellor announces make any difference or is that just all an empty ritual?

Ruth Fox: And is Parliament getting serious about how the laws it has already passed are working out?

Mark D'Arcy: But first Ruth, let's talk about Rachel Reeves [00:01:00] Spring Statement next week. It's actually the Spring Economic Announcement, or the Spring Forecast.

Ruth Fox: Spring forecast, yes.

Mark D'Arcy: Or something like that. It's supposed to be quite a low key event. It's supposed to be a kind of update based on the latest projections that have emerged from the Treasury and the Office for Budget Responsibility.

Slight course correction, nothing very big, just keeping you informed, guys, kind of deal. Not so much this time. Kemi Badenoch caused a bit of a furore at Prime Minister's Question Time this week when she referred to it quite deliberately as an emergency budget, implying that the government's being forced into making really serious changes because things have gone awry and their strategy isn't working, there was a roar of derision from Labour MPs.

But there is, I think, a bit of a graduation here that we've got to talk about. What's the difference between a statement, first of all, and a budget, or a mini budget, or an emergency budget, or any of the other possible identities that might be pinned on to the event that's due to happen next Wednesday?

Ruth Fox: Yeah, well, you've got to [00:02:00] go back, Mark, nearly 10 years, goodness, to sort of explain the history of this. So, in 2016, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer decided we should have just one fiscal event, as it's called, per year. So, one major event where they announced tax and spending changes. And that was going to be the budget

Mark D'Arcy: The then chancellor of the Exchequer was

Ruth Fox: Philip Hammond, I think. I wouldn't, I wouldn't swear by that, but I'm pretty sure it was Philip Hammond. He basically wanted one fiscal event, so there'd be autumn budget, and then in the spring there would be this forecast, this statement by the Chancellor, which would be solely a response to the second forecast in the year by the Office for Budget Responsibility, which is the independent body that was established under the coalition years to provide independent authoritative analysis on the state of the public finances, the government's tax and spend plans and so on.

And it's proved a bit of a straitjacket around chancellors because it forecasts whether the government is going to meet its fiscal rules, which we'll come onto in a minute. But, for context, most countries only have one fiscal event. We were unusual in having two in a year.

Use the links below to subscribe to the Hansard Society's Parliament Matters podcast on your preferred app, or search for 'Parliament Matters' on whichever podcasting service you use. If you are unable to find our podcast, please email us here.

Apple

YouTube Podcasts

Spotify

More ways to subscribe

Parliament Matters homepage

Latest / Highlights

Submissions / Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties - Our evidence to the House of Lords International Agreements Committee

Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 2-6 June 2025

Legislation to give Ministers powers to update product regulations, including by aligning with EU standards, will be debated by MPs. The battle between the Commons and the Lords over AI and copyright provisions in the Data (Use and Access) Bill enters a further round, led by Baroness Kidron who is championing the interests of the creative industries. MPs will debate an e-petition to decriminalise abortion. The Border Security Bill, Employment Rights Bill, and Sentencing Guidelines Bill will be scrutinised by Peers. There are backbench debates on high street banking closures and the safety of battery energy storage. Increases to Peers' allowances and a new second homes allowance will be put to the Lords. The Home Secretary and Lord Chancellor face oral questions from MPs.

News / Will Parliament get its teeth into Keir Starmer's trade deals? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 94

You wait ages for a post-Brexit trade deal – and then three show up at once. With the Government unveiling new agreements with India, the US and the EU, we explore why Parliament has so little influence over these major international agreements. Liam Byrne MP, a former Labour Minister and current chair of the House of Commons Business and Trade Committee argues that this needs to change. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / Assisted dying bill: Special series #12 - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 93

Is Kim Leadbeater's Assisted Dying Bill now "over the hump?" The Bill's supporters got it though its first day of Report Stage consideration in the House of Commons unscathed, with comfortable majorities in every vote. So, with debate on the most contentious set of amendments disposed of, will it now coast through its remaining scrutiny days in the Commons? Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

Submissions / Status and rights of independent MPs in Parliament – Our evidence to the House of Commons Procedure Committee

Our evidence on the status and rights of independent MPs has been published by the House of Commons Procedure Committee. Our submission summarises the direct and indirect references to political parties in the Standing Orders and whether they might apply to groupings of independent MPs, analyses whether small parties and independent groupings face disadvantages, particularly in relation to committee membership, and considers whether parliamentary publications should distinguish between the many different kinds of independent MP.