← Back to House of Commons Debates
Office for Budget Responsibility Forecasts 2025-12-01
01 December 2025
Lead MP
James Murray
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
NHSEconomy
Other Contributors: 54
At a Glance
James Murray raised concerns about office for budget responsibility forecasts 2025-12-01 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Chancellor has been consistent and up front with the public about her priorities at the Budget, which were to cut NHS waiting lists, reduce cost of living, and reduce debt and borrowing. She was clear on 4 November that a lower productivity forecast would mean lower tax receipts, confirmed by OBR as £16 billion lower due to reduced productivity forecasts. The Chancellor also indicated she intended to build more headroom, with £21.7 billion against the stability rule. However, she knew there was only £4.2 billion of headroom against her fiscal rules and a deficit would be incurred before any priorities could be met.
Mel Stride
Con
Central Devon
The handling of the Budget has been a disaster from start to finish. The conduct in Government fell short of transparency, openness and integrity standards. The impression given was that there was a concerted attempt to paint an inaccurate picture of the public finances to give political cover for tax and welfare spending increases. On 4 November, the Chancellor failed to mention that the net result in OBR’s review showed increased tax revenues instead of a black hole. There was a significant proportion of the increase in taxes used to fund policy decisions on welfare spending.
James Murray
Con
Defended the Chancellor's actions, denied claims of inappropriate briefings and called for a full investigation into the OBR leak. Emphasised the need for fiscal prudence due to the productivity downgrade.
James Murray
Con
Responded to concerns raised by shadow Chancellor about OBR leaks, acknowledging the real impact of productivity downgrade but attributing it to previous government policies. Defended current Government's fiscal decisions and commitment to Budget security.
Meg Hillier
Lab/Co-op
Hackney South and Shoreditch
Welcomed OBR report but expressed concern over leaks during the Budget process, called for proper discussions within government to prevent future leaks. Mentioned the importance of market integrity.
James Murray
Con
Reassured Dame Meg Hillier about the Government's commitment to maintaining budget security and promised a review based on OBR recommendations.
Daisy Cooper
Lib Dem
St Albans
Asked for clarity regarding potential criminal or civil actions due to leak incidents. Questioned government’s transparency in business rates communication and suggested reviewing Sweden's budget process model.
James Murray
Con
Reiterated commitment to taking forward OBR recommendations, emphasised security measures across all government bodies, defended Chancellor's decisions based on productivity downgrade and transitional relief for businesses.
Luke Murphy
Lab
Basingstoke
Challenged the Conservative Party’s stance on public finances, pointing out inconsistencies and responsibility issues stemming from previous economic mismanagement.
James Murray
SNP
Dunbartonshire East
Defended government actions regarding budget process integrity, emphasising robust relationship with OBR. Reiterated that early publication was due to addressing productivity downgrades and building fiscal stability.
Harriett Baldwin
Con
West Worcestershire
Pointed out the shocking nature of leaks from the Office for Budget Responsibility, questioning the Treasury's role in partial information releases that have caused economic uncertainty. Suggested a thorough investigation into these leaks by relevant authorities.
Jim Dickson
Lab
Dartford
Questioned whether there should be an inquiry by the National Crime Agency and National Cyber Security Centre to determine if illegal activities occurred during leaks, suggesting that sensitive information could have been traded based on leaks.
Bath
Expressed concern over weeks of speculation damaging businesses before the Budget. Believed the government could have done more to prevent such speculation and uncertainty in the run-up to the budget.
Antonia Bance
Lab
Tipton and Wednesbury
Expressed worry over repeated attempts to access statements before publication, questioning why Conservative Members weren't more concerned. Highlighted risks of having only £4 billion in headroom for fiscal stability.
John Glen
Con
Salisbury
Welcomed the report stating issues with document hosting across Cabinet Office, Treasury and OBR but emphasised that the material distinction between a significant black hole needing tax increase and actual forecasted impact must not be lost.
Barry Gardiner
Lab
Brent North
Asked if anyone in the OBR leadership had offered resignation given their responsibility for circumstances leading to vulnerability. Emphasised the importance of stability through fiscal headroom.
Stephen Flynn
SNP
Aberdeen South
Critiqued the Chancellor's credibility, pointing out job losses due to punitive energy profits levy. Questioned why ministers kept their jobs while constituents lost theirs over policy impacts.
Polly Billington
Lab
East Thanet
Acknowledged the importance of fiscal headroom for stability, emphasising how it helps maintain economic buffer against future shocks and positive bond market response to the budget.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Described the Budget as chaotic and dangerous. Criticised media briefings that informed speculation, suggesting damage to reputation. Demanded an apology from the government for their handling of the budget process.
Noah Law
Lab
St Austell and Newquay
Emphasised the importance of following proper OBR processes, noting past consequences of bypassing it. Highlighted contrast between current and previous government's relationship with OBR.
The Government takes this matter seriously, recognising the value of the OBR's role in a robust fiscal framework. He confirms that deeper forensic examination will be conducted on recent Economic and Fiscal Outlook (EFO) events, highlighting the need for a serious response to restore public confidence.
Clive Jones
LD
Wokingham
Mr Jones criticises past Conservative mismanagement and calls for steps to rectify damage done to efforts of delivering transparency and honesty. He seeks clarity on what steps the Government will take in response to this breach.
Jayne Kirkham
Lab/Co-op
Truro and Falmouth
Kirkham raises concerns over previous leaks, urges for a full investigation into who was trying to access the information, and seeks confirmation on when last there was headroom as low as £4 billion.
Simon Hoare
Con
North Dorset
Hoare suggests that this event reflects poorly on the OBR's capabilities and questions whether it is fit for purpose. He proposes considering making the Treasury responsible for budget predictions, tapping into expertise within the Bank of England.
Rachael Maskell
Lab/Co-op
York Central
Maskell calls for a detailed timetable of economic information received by the Chancellor and expresses concern over previous leaks compromising the integrity of the Budget process.
Sammy Wilson
DUP
East Antrim
Wilson criticises the Chancellor's use of selective information to distort forecasts, suggesting that this undermines the credibility of economic predictions. He questions whether briefing by special advisers or officials contributed to leaks.
Hendon
Pinto-Duschinsky expresses shock over systematic failures in cyber-security leading to breaches, and calls for the resignation of the OBR chair based on these serious failures.
Gavin Williamson
Con
Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge
Williamson questions sources of pre-Budget leaks, suggesting that they may have originated from special advisers, Treasury officials or No. 10, implying potential misuse of information.
Wolverhampton North East
Brackenridge is concerned about leaks affecting previous fiscal events and welcomes the Chancellor’s decision to more than double fiscal headroom as strengthening UK resilience.
Richard Tice
Reform
Boston and Skegness
Tice argues that the Minister has misled Parliament on three occasions regarding borrowing forecasts, highlighting an increase in Government borrowing over five years compared to earlier OBR predictions.
Chris Vince
Lab/Co-op
Harlow
Vince acknowledges the disappointment of leaks but focuses on positive aspects of the Budget such as freezing rail fares and prescription charges, lowering NHS waiting times and tackling tax evasion.
Wendy Morton
Con
Aldridge-Brownhills
Morton criticises the Minister for misleading Parliament and questions why the Chancellor is not present to address concerns raised during the Budget debate.
Callum Anderson
Lab
Buckingham and Bletchley
Anderson asks about governance changes being considered by the Department to ensure those overseeing fiscal processes meet high standards of conduct. He also seeks clarity on confidence in OBR’s head delivering such changes.
Defended the Government's budget decisions, highlighted benefits for Wales and other regions. Mentioned resignations of OBR chair due to IT infrastructure failures.
Laurence Turner
Lab
Birmingham Northfield
Criticised the Treasury for failing to address critical IT infrastructure issues at the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), leading to leaks and a loss of credibility. Suggested resignation of OBR chair.
Luke Evans
Con
Hinckley and Bosworth
Accused the Labour Government of breaking manifesto commitments regarding taxation, questioned legality if constituents refuse to pay taxes.
Andrew Pakes
Lab
Peterborough
Expressed concern over multiple leaks from OBR and the impact on speculation and costs. Asked for clarification on previous leak incidents.
Ellie Chowns
Green
North Herefordshire
Proposed a legal measure to make it an offence for politicians to mislead the public deliberately on verifiable facts, aimed at rebuilding trust in politics.
Peter Swallow
Lab
Bracknell
Challenged Conservative criticisms of economy and public finances as inconsistent. Highlighted Chancellor’s commitment to stabilising economy.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
Critiqued the Chancellor's approach during Budget presentation, suggested seizing control from unaccountable OBR for transparency.
Calder Valley
Inquired about likely market impact if headroom was lower than £21.7 billion, emphasised need for greater financial stability.
Sarah Bool
Con
South Northamptonshire
Accused Chancellor of leaking Budget details to media and prioritising Back Benchers over public confidence. Asked for steps to address the leak issue.
Steve Race
Lab
Exeter
Expressed concern over OBR productivity downgrade, questioned persistent underperformance in productivity since 2010.
Sarah Dyke
LD
Glastonbury and Somerton
Questioned accuracy of figures regarding agricultural property relief and business property relief. Demanded clarity on economic strategy for rural businesses.
Mike Wood
Con
Kingswinford and South Staffordshire
Pressed Chief Secretary to clarify timeline of learning about Treasury's briefing discrepancies to the press.
Kieran Mullan
Con
Bexhill and Battle
I feel I should declare at the start of this question that I am one of the few people in the Chamber who apparently is not shocked at what has been going on this week. The handling of this Budget has been a disaster from start to finish.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
The Chancellor announced that her plans aim to fund public services, avoid austerity and invest for the future, portraying a positive future and spending that seems manageable. Meanwhile, the OBR forecasts that if borrowing increases in the short term, it could have a potential impact on future spending in terms of welfare and debt interest.
John Lamont
Con
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk
Andy Haldane, former Bank of England chief economist, has said that the Government’s “repeated mistakes” and misinformation about the public finances have sucked all the energy from the economy. Chief Secretary, the former chief economist is correct, isn’t he?
Alec Shelbrooke
Con
Wetherby and Easingwold
There has been too much obfuscation today between what the Office for Budget Responsibility did in leaking its report early and the fact that the Office for Budget Responsibility told the Chancellor before she made her statement about there not being the fiscal black hole that she made out. How can this Government start to rebuild trust with the public when they are simply trying to do smoke and mirrors?
Harriet Cross
Con
Gordon and Buchan
The forecasts are meant to help the Government to decide what to do, but there was nothing in this forecast of oil and gas revenues, which explains why the energy profits levy was kept. We have seen a £6.2 billion downgrade in the expected revenue from oil and gas to the end of the Budget period—a 40% decrease in just a year.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Spelthorne
When did the Chancellor first brief her Cabinet colleagues on the realities of the OBR forecast?
Blake Stephenson
Con
Mid Bedfordshire
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury failed to answer a critical question raised by my right hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor and a similar question raised by the hon. Member for St Albans, so I will ask the question in a slightly different way. Does the Minister agree that the FCA must urgently investigate whether conduct has fallen short of part 7 of the Financial Services Act 2012?
Jerome Mayhew
Con
Broadland and Fakenham
It has been dragged out of the Government that there was no black hole of £20 billion to £30 billion in the run-up to the Budget. In fact, there was a surplus. That means that Treasury insiders were deliberately misleading the press, the markets and our constituents in the run-up to the Budget.
Solihull West and Shirley
The British public are, by nature, a forgiving people. However, does the Chief Secretary to the Treasury not recognise that obfuscation of the kind we have seen over the weekend deeply damages public confidence?
Iqbal Mohamed
Ind
Dewsbury and Batley
According to the latest House of Commons Library briefing and the economic forecasts, the freeze on the income tax threshold is projected to raise over £38 billion per year by 2029-30. Does the Minister agree with the Chancellor’s statement that she met Labour’s manifesto pledge not to raise income taxes, and does he agree that she misled the public and this House?
Government Response
Defended government actions related to budget leaks, productivity downgrade impact, and fiscal decisions. Called for adherence to strict budget security measures. The Government takes this matter seriously and is conducting a thorough investigation, emphasising the importance of preserving the independence and integrity of the Office for Budget Responsibility. Defended Government's budget decisions, highlighted benefits for Wales, confirmed resignation of OBR chair due to IT failures. Stressed transparency and fair handling of ministerial standards. The Chancellor chose on 4 November to be up front with people about the challenges we face. At the Budget, she chose to cut the cost of living, cut NHS waiting lists and cut Government borrowing. Long-term stability is at the heart of the fiscal rules that the Chancellor introduced at the Budget last year, which were met at the spring statement earlier this year and were met again at the Budget last week. As many hon. Members have mentioned today, the fact that we are meeting those fiscal rules with far greater headroom—£21.7 billion in this Budget—gives us greater stability, helps to bring down the costs of Government borrowing and protects us from future shocks.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.