Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the net impact of (a) Government policies since 4 July 2024, (b) the Autumn Budget 2024 and (c) the Spring Statement 2025 has been on the Office for Budget Responsibility's forecasts for real household disposable income per person in each financial year between 2024-25 and 2029-30.
Answered by Darren Jones - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
HM Treasury does not prepare forecasts for the UK economy. Forecasts, including for real household disposable income per person, are the responsibility of the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). These forecasts are published by the OBR as part of their Economic and Fiscal Outlook (EFO).
The OBR’s assessment of policy decisions at the 2024 Autumn Budget can be found in their October 2024 EFO, available here: https://obr.uk/efo/economic-and-fiscal-outlook-october-2024/
The OBR’s assessment of policy decisions at the 2025 Spring Statement can be found in their March 2025 EFO, available here: https://obr.uk/efo/economic-and-fiscal-outlook-march-2025/
In their March forecast, after accounting for the effects of policy at both events, the OBR forecast was for RHDI per capita to rise by an annual average of 0.5% over this parliament (Q3 2024 – Q2 2029).
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what proportion of the additional defence expenditure she announced at the Spring Statement falls under capital departmental expenditure limits; what proportion falls under resource departmental expenditure limits; and for what reason these allocations were arrived at.
Answered by Darren Jones - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
The Chancellor’s Spring Statement document, published on 26 March, set out the Resource DEL and Capital DEL uplifts to defence spending over the scorecard period.
A greater proportion of the uplift will be Capital DEL funding. This reflects the needs of defence, and will enable the accelerated the adoption of cutting-edge capabilities, and rebuild stockpiles, munitions, and other essentials depleted after a period focussed on international terrorism and global crises. This Capital DEL focus also supports the Chancellor’s mission to boost growth, enabling greater spending on novel and innovative technologies.
The allocation of this uplift and the MOD budget will be confirmed as part of the Spending Review 2025, which will conclude on 11 June 2025.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to paragraph 3.2 of the Office for Budget Responsibility's Economic and Fiscal Outlook, published on 26 March 2025, how the policies scored at the Spring Statement differ from the policies announced by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on 18 March 2025; and for what reason these policies were changed.
Answered by Darren Jones - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
In response to feedback from the Office for Budget Responsibility, the government made amendments to the policy parameters of two measures. Firstly, the Universal Credit standard allowance will reach £106 per week in 2029-30, an increase above inflation. This differs to the level of £107 per week in 2029-30, which was the latest policy assumption at the time of the statement to the House delivered by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on 18 March 2025. Secondly, the government will freeze the reduced Universal Credit health element level for new claimants, in line with our objectives to rebalance the system, rather than uprating it by Consumer Price Index inflation, which was the policy assumption at the time of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions’s statement to the House on 18 March 2025.
These updates were made after statement, once the Office for Budget Responsibility had given its final assessment of the costings and behavioural assumptions associated with the measures. The adjustments we have made ensure we continue to strike the right balance between setting strong work incentives and fiscal sustainability. This package remains consistent with the government’s Green Paper and the statement to the House made by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on 18 March 2025.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether it is her Department's policy that people with (a) more than £16,000 in savings, (b) a full National Insurance record and (c) a work-limiting health condition will not be eligible for support through the benefits system after the time-limited period of the proposed new single contributory benefit has elapsed.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
This is not current government policy. We are consulting on plans for a new “Unemployment Insurance”. We are asking about what the right level of support is and how long it should last, and we would welcome your response. No final decisions have been taken. To confirm, both Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment will continue to exist in the reformed system.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether her Department's proposed reforms to contributory out of work benefits are expected to reduce contributory benefits as a proportion of overall welfare expenditure.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Our proposed reforms to contributory benefits are about creating a more proactive, pro-work system that actually supports individuals. While the reforms are part of a package that will make the benefits system more affordable, they will also ensure that the system continues to provide for those who need it most, while supporting those who can, back into work. We are consulting on establishing a new, simple and clear “Unemployment Insurance” benefit through the reform of contributory working age benefits and we welcome responses. No final decisions have been taken.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what proportion of new style Employment and Support Allowance claims have been in payment for at least (a) three, (b) six, (c) 12, and (d) 18 months for (i) the Work Related Activity Group and (ii) the Support Group.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The following table shows the volume of new style Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) and Support Group (SG) claims that have been in payment for at least three, six, 12 and 18 months.
Volumes of ESA claims that have been in payment for at least three, six, 12 and 18 months
In payment for at least: | Work-related Activity Group | Support Group |
3 months | 6,000 | 708,000 |
6 months | 5,000 | 701,000 |
12 months | 1,000 | 677,000 |
18 months | - | 653,000 |
Source: DWP administrative data for Employment and Support Allowance
Volumes have been rounded to the nearest 1,000.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of her Department's proposed reforms to eligibility for Personal Independence Payment on employment.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Information on the impacts of the Pathways to Work Green Paper will be published in due course, and some information was published alongside the Spring Statement. These publications can be found in ‘Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper’.
A further programme of analysis to support development of the proposals in the Green Paper will be developed and undertaken in the coming months.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether capital departmental expenditure by his Department can fund an expansion in the size of the armed forces; and how much and what proportion of the additional defence expenditure announced at the Spring Statement (a) is expected to and (b) could potentially fund an expansion in the size of the armed forces.
Answered by Luke Pollard - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
Any expansion in the size of the Armed Forces would predominantly result in an increase to resource spending rather than capital spending. However, the capitalisation of workforce costs directly employed in bringing a capital asset into service is allowed under International Accounting Standards. Further detail on how the Department applies workforce capitalisation can be found in the Annual Report and Accounts, available here:
The £2.2 billion uplift to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) budget for 2025-26 will support investment in:
· Enhancing the UK's programme of joint exercises with NATO allies to ensure we are ready to respond together to the threats we now face.
· Investment in advanced technology such as Directed Energy Weapons, which will revolutionise our Armed Forces' capabilities.
· Capitalising on the opportunity presented by the buy-back of the MOD Service Families housing stock, to refurbish the defence estate and provide our military families with the homes they deserve.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 26 March 2025 to Question 40157 on Public Expenditure, and with reference to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury's statement to the House on 28 October 2024, Official Report, column 562, whether it is her Department's policy to target an overall budget surplus.
Answered by Darren Jones - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
At Autumn Budget 2024, the government confirmed new fiscal rules to put the public finances on a sustainable path, and prioritise investment to support long-term growth.
The stability rule is that the current budget must be in surplus in 2029-30, until 29-30 becomes the third year of the forecast period. From that point, the current budget must then remain in balance or in surplus from the third year of the rolling forecast period, where balance is defined as a range: in surplus, or in deficit of no more than 0.5% of GDP. This range will support the government’s commitment to a single fiscal event every year by avoiding the need for policy adjustment at forecasts outside of fiscal events. If the range is used between fiscal events, the current budget must return to surplus from the third year at the following fiscal event.
In its March 2025 forecast, the independent Office for Budget Responsibility confirmed the government was on track to meet its stability and investment rules two years early. By 2029-30, the current budget is forecast to be in a surplus of £9.9 billion.
Asked by: Mel Stride (Conservative - Central Devon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to paragraph 3.2 of the Office for Budget Responsibility's Economic and Fiscal Outlook, published on 26 March 2025, what changes were made to the reduction in the level of the Universal Credit health element following the certification deadline; and for what reason.
Answered by Darren Jones - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
In response to feedback from the Office for Budget Responsibility, the government made amendments to the policy parameters of the changes to the Universal Credit health element. The government is freezing the reduced Universal Credit health element level for new claimants, in line with our objectives to rebalance the system, rather than uprating it by Consumer Price Index inflation.
This update was made after the statement to the House delivered by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on 18 March 2025, once the Office for Budget Responsibility had given its final assessment of the costing and behavioural assumptions associated with the measure. The adjustments were made to ensure we continue to strike the right balance between setting strong work incentives and fiscal sustainability.