Five ways the budget shows Rachel Reeves is thinking long-term more than the Tories ever did
- Written by Nathan Critch, Research Associate, Department of Politics, University of Manchester
Chancellor Rachel Reeves presented Labour’s first budget[1] in 14 years by promising to put an “end to short-termism”[2].
British governments typically see budgets as an opportunity to present policies providing short-term gain in terms of public popularity, even if they do little to improve Britain’s long-term economic prospects. Over the past ten years, governments have adopted and then abandoned 11 different economic strategies[3], and seven different fiscal rules[4].
The last Conservative government’s budget contained a range of tax cuts, most notably a 2p cut on National Insurance. Little consideration was given to the medium-term implications of these cuts[5]. Labour inherited a funding squeeze, alongside the need to balance the books over a five-year period based on the previous fiscal rules[6].
This kind of short-termism is a familiar feature[7] within British economic policymaking. A winner-takes-all, majoritarian electoral system encourages governments to prioritise electoral considerations[8] over a longer-term economic strategy.
Here’s how Reeves is taking a different approach in her first budget.
1. Long-term strategy
Reeves has underscored Labour’s commitment to long-termism through various institutional reforms. The government had already announced the creation of a new body[9] to drive a new industrial strategy. This will now be accompanied by a new National Wealth Fund[10] to provide private investment into infrastructure.
The launch of the Office for Value for Money[11] will scrutinise spending decisions. And the Office for Budget Responsibility’s role in assessing the impact[12] of capital investments, government policies and departmental spending will be enhanced.
And while the integrated financial settlements will empower the West Midlands and Greater Manchester, the approach stops short of fully downloading financial independence to the regions. A focus on selective regions also only adds to existing asymmetries[30] in the powers regions have. A systematically thought-out approach that covers the whole UK would go further, but remains remote.
Finally, while the government has spent big on education and health, real departmental funding is only set to rise by 1.5%[31]. Pre-budget, concerns were raised[32] about the effect tight funding settlements might have for non-protected departments, especially when these cuts come to bite in 2028-29[33].
The spectre this raises for Labour is that a short-term squeeze on day-to-day departmental spending risks undermining the work it has done to secure long-term investment for growth.
References
- ^ Labour’s first budget (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk)
- ^ “end to short-termism” (www.lgcplus.com)
- ^ 11 different economic strategies (www.ippr.org)
- ^ seven different fiscal rules (www.economicsobservatory.com)
- ^ implications of these cuts (www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk)
- ^ fiscal rules (www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk)
- ^ familiar feature (journals.sagepub.com)
- ^ prioritise electoral considerations (theconversation.com)
- ^ a new body (www.gov.uk)
- ^ National Wealth Fund (www.gov.uk)
- ^ Office for Value for Money (www.gov.uk)
- ^ assessing the impact (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk)
- ^ politics newsletter (theconversation.com)
- ^ changed the government’s fiscal rules (www.google.co.uk)
- ^ £6.1 billion into “growth sectors” (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ £100 billion over the next five years (www.gov.uk)
- ^ infrastructure projects (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk)
- ^ promised £5 billion (www.architectsjournal.co.uk)
- ^ regional growth and place (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ since taking office (www.gov.uk)
- ^ Barnett formula (www.bbc.co.uk)
- ^ West Midlands and Greater Manchester (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ public services (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ crumbling services (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ local government funding (www.lgcplus.com)
- ^ industrial and economic strategy (www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk)
- ^ One in five councils at risk of 'bankruptcy' – what happens after local authorities run out of money (theconversation.com)
- ^ coordination across government (www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk)
- ^ Neil Hall/EPA-EFE (epaimages.com)
- ^ existing asymmetries (academic.oup.com)
- ^ rise by 1.5% (www.ft.com)
- ^ concerns were raised (www.ft.com)
- ^ in 2028-29 (www.civilserviceworld.com)