Reeves criticises the unfunded £46 billion national insurance cut, questioning how it will be financed without harming borrowing or increasing tax burdens elsewhere. She also points out that pensioners face an average increase of £1000 in taxes under the current plans and stresses Labour's intention to close non-dom tax loopholes for fairer taxation.

Ali supports Reeves' argument, confirming that households will be £870 worse off under the Conservative plans by 2026-27.

Grant agrees with Reeves that leaving tax thresholds untouched amid rising pay and prices is a stealth tax, echoing previous Labour critiques under Gordon Brown’s tenure.

Graham challenges Reeves' figures on pensioner taxes, arguing that pensioners will receive £3700 more than in 2010 due to state pension increases and other benefits, questioning the basis of her claims.

Grant presses for clarification on Reeves' figures regarding tax rises impacting pensioners.

The Secretary of State criticised Labour's approach to tax, pointing out that their £28 billion spending plan was not realistic. He acknowledged the acceptance of some tax measures but challenged Labour's commitment to NHS and dentistry funding without raising taxes or increasing borrowing. Stride emphasised the economic challenges posed by the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, highlighting Government support for vulnerable groups through a £400 billion intervention. He also discussed the impact on pensioners and growth forecasts, arguing that despite recent technical recession, Britain's forecasted growth would outperform Germany, France, and Italy. Stride dismissed criticisms about unfunded commitments to scrapping national insurance contributions.

As the first speaker mentioned but did not provide a full contribution in the given text, there is no position recorded for Rosie Winterton.

The Minister mentions making work pay, but Unison has pointed out that a number of social care workers are being disadvantaged because HMRC mileage rates have not changed since 2010. Does the Treasury not believe that the cost of running a motor vehicle has changed in the last 14 years?

I am incredibly grateful to the Minister for giving way a second time. I remind him that the tax burden has gone up by £27 billion in the last year, and it will go up by £19 billion after the election because of decisions his party made. People who earn less than £19,000 will be worse off because of the Budget. Two decades of lost pay growth—that is the record of his Government over the last 14 years.

It has been widely reported that the taxpayer is having to pick up the tab for £15,000 of legal costs and damages incurred because of the actions of the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the right hon. Member for Chippenham (Michelle Donelan), who is rapidly becoming known as the hon. Member for “chipping in”. Will the Minister confirm that the figure of £15,000 is correct? Will he say whether he thinks it is morally right that the taxpayer should be picking up the bill for the outrageous lack of judgment and behaviour of one of his colleagues?

My right hon. Friend is making a good case for yesterday’s announcements in the Budget. He has dealt very thoroughly with Labour’s record when in office, but will he turn his attention to its present proposals? If Labour will not reverse the tax on non-doms or the cuts to national insurance, does that not leave a whopping £6.5 billion in uncosted expenditure pledges?

May I take him back to the subject of ordinary people? As a result of last year’s mini-Budget, people who remortgage are now paying £240 more—real money for them—than they were previously. If he does not accept that there is a £46 billion hole as a result of yesterday’s announcement, will he tell us what he thinks the figure is? Can he assure people who are remortgaging this year that they will not be further impacted by yesterday’s announcement and that there will not be a further scare on those markets?

On that point, will the Minister give way?

The Government make much of getting value for money, but they have little to say about the handing over of Teesside’s greatest land asset to two private developers, who have since banked tens of millions of pounds in profits, leaving crumbs for the public. That is after the investment of £500 million of taxpayers’ money and no private investment. Is the Minister content with that, or does he believe, as his own Government’s inquiry into the Tees Mayor’s business dealings recommended, that the deal should be renegotiated?

The Minister is right that I warmly welcome that extension. Is there not a strong case for making the household support fund permanent, not just extending it for another six months?

Mr. Grant criticised the Chancellor's Budget for failing to address issues such as public services, cost of living, and climate change. He argued that rewarding work should mean paying a living wage and not just a minimum wage. Mr. Grant noted that the tax burden has increased significantly under this Government, disproportionately affecting those on lower incomes. He highlighted child poverty in Scotland being reduced through initiatives like free school meals and early learning support, contrasting it with UK-wide measures. Additionally, he discussed potential improvements to protect workers' rights and supported actions towards net zero emissions.

Welcomes the Government's rethink on national insurance and unfairness of high income child benefit charge. Criticises current tax burden and lack of clarity in economic policies, despite previous rhetoric supporting lower taxes and enterprise. Questions the increase in public sector spending and low productivity in the NHS. Emphasises need for greater focus on productivity improvements and reducing taxes to promote growth.

The speaker highlighted the severe financial pressures faced by schools and local authorities, revealing that half of all headteachers have made reductions to teaching staff this year. She cited a survey showing that 84% of primary heads had not replaced staff who left, with 73% reducing support staff and 47% planning redundancies. Additionally, there's an increase in children requiring special educational needs support which schools struggle to fund. The speaker also addressed the impact on councils dealing with overspends for high-needs children and a surge in numbers of children needing care placements. She questioned why it has taken so long to address issues such as profiteering within private fostering providers, urging for more support for kinship carers beyond narrow eligibility criteria.

She emphasised the importance of taking sensible decisions in public life to ensure positive outcomes for those served, particularly highlighting challenges faced by children with special educational needs. She discussed the under-investment in special provision and highlighted the need for a more granular approach to delivering desired outcomes. She also pointed out that while local authorities are responsible for ensuring statements of special educational needs, they face budget pressures and require high-level solutions for funding social care. She advocated for mature and sensible financial decisions by councils.

She intervened to support the need for a serious look at special needs provision across the country, highlighting the damaging situation for young people and advocating for cooperation between local authorities to understand both demand and existing provisions.

He intervened to praise Jackie Doyle-Price's points about SEND children and kinship carers, emphasising the need to address their needs.

The Budget is a reckless gimmick that fails to address the pressing needs of public services. It will worsen living standards, with real wages not expected to return to 2008 levels until 2026. The impact on food prices and poverty rates further highlights the failure of economic policy under Conservative rule.

Welcomes the Budget measures, especially the cut in national insurance and reduction in inflation. Stresses the importance of work for financial security and personal fulfillment. Criticises benefits as a lifestyle choice and supports targeted welfare assistance. Emphasises the positive impact of universal credit reforms on employment rates. Raises concerns about mental health conditions being cited as reasons for economic inactivity, suggesting over-medicalisation of normal life challenges. Mentions local investments such as the Alex hospital expansion and cultural projects. Celebrates the council's housing programme.

Families in my constituency have felt the consequences of the Government’s political chaos and economic incompetence. Five Prime Ministers, seven Chancellors and 11 plans for growth have all left them worse off than they were 14 years ago. The Budget will not change that, and, crucially, the Government know it. If the Conservatives had grown the economy at average OECD rates, households would be an astonishing £5,000 better off each year. That sum could provide financial security to families in Bristol South. Instead, food prices are 25% higher than two years ago, rents have increased by 10%, and people face higher mortgages as a result of the mini-Budget. The tax burden remains the highest in a generation. Local spending cuts mean fewer police on the streets, cut bus routes, and increased pressure on health services. Councils of all political stripes are declaring bankruptcy due to Conservative funding failures. Bristol’s Labour-run council has managed to maintain vital services despite the Conservative Government's actions. We have protected the most vulnerable with 12,500 more homes and planning permission for 14,000 dwellings, accelerating delivery of council-owned homes. To kick-start growth, we need to invest in workforce skills through a reformed growth and skills levy giving employers flexibility to use funding for training people, especially young ones, in future job requirements. We want to grasp the green agenda by establishing GB Energy for clean power, creating jobs, and lower bills; our national wealth fund will invest in industry for green initiatives.

Collins discussed the sale of NatWest bank, emphasising that the Conservative party took responsibility for fixing the economy after inheriting a crisis from the previous Labour government. He highlighted the necessity of increasing borrowing and taxes to manage crises such as the banking collapse and the pandemic, stressing that this was necessary but required careful financial management. Collins defended the current government's approach to spending on infrastructure like schools and HS2, while criticising Labour for an unclear plan regarding funding and prioritising higher spending over tax cuts.

Western intervened to argue that the opportunity to invest in infrastructure during low interest rates was missed. He questioned whether Collins regretted this missed opportunity, suggesting it could have helped repair schools and other essential infrastructure.

McMahon intervened to highlight that the NHS waiting list had increased significantly under Conservative rule before the pandemic. He also questioned Collins' confidence in the funding of new transport projects like HS2, suggesting there could be a future funding gap.

Mr. Western criticises the recent Budget, highlighting economic issues such as low growth, high mortgage payments, and increased tax burden. He emphasises the government's failure to address urgent issues like school infrastructure, dentistry, homelessness, and contaminated blood scandal. The speaker also mentions negative per capita growth for seven consecutive quarters, leading to lower real incomes by the end of Parliament. He argues that the Chancellor’s plan is weak on energy prices, housing system, long-term solutions, motorist support, small businesses, business investment, productivity, and tax rises. Furthermore, he calls out the government's lack of an industrial strategy and their failure in harnessing higher education sector power. Mr. Western concludes by advocating for change with a Labour-led government that promises stability, strategy, and sense.

The speaker supports the Budget and emphasises several positive measures, including a reduction in national insurance contributions and the decrease in inflation. He argues that criticism of the budget fails to acknowledge the economic challenges posed by the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. Clifton-Brown also points out that Opposition Members would have spent similarly if faced with similar circumstances.

Kinnock questions the Conservative claim of a lower tax burden, citing an email from the Chancellor to Conservative party members which suggests plans to scrap NICs in the next Parliament. He highlights that this would leave a £46 billion black hole in public finances and asks for clarity on how it will be addressed.

McMahon agrees with Kinnock's critique of the Conservative claim regarding the tax burden. He points out that freezing the personal tax allowance has a significant impact on taxpayers.

Hammond highlights the extension of full expensing relief to leased assets as one of the key measures from the Budget, arguing it will drive up growth and business investment, which he claims is now at its highest since Labour was in power.

Ms Onwurah criticised the Government for failing her constituents and highlighted the negative impacts of Tory economic policies, including rising child poverty rates in working families. She emphasised that Labour's workforce plan would bring positive changes to the NHS, productivity improvements, security in work, housing, poverty reduction, and bill relief. She also raised concerns about the loan charge scandal affecting retirees and called for an independent review.

Mr. Kruger welcomed the constructive tone of the debate but criticised Labour for advocating increased public spending while complaining about high taxes. He noted that public services have received repeated investments and acknowledged recent economic improvements such as falling inflation, rising wages, and decreasing mortgage rates. Mr. Kruger highlighted tax cuts totaling £20 billion from national insurance, benefiting workers over £900 each, and a cut of around £650 for the average self-employed person. He also welcomed changes to high-income child benefit charges, extensions to household support funds, and efforts to improve public sector productivity. Mr. Kruger expressed concerns about structural economic issues, including cheap money, low interest rates, imported goods, and geographic inequality. He called for more house building, land reform, and reforms in the labour market to increase employment, particularly through programmes like WorkWell. He criticised the slow uplift in defence spending.

Ms. Onwurah intervened to clarify that she did not ask for increased spending and accused the Conservative Government of failing to provide growth, leading to crumbling services.

The Chancellor's Budget fails to address the pressing issues such as the cost of living crisis and lack of economic growth. Constituents demand prioritisation of these issues, but the Government has not acted accordingly. The highest level of tax in 70 years is being imposed by the current regime, yet they claim it’s a tax-cutting Budget. Furthermore, small businesses continue to suffer from high energy bills and taxes, while critical social welfare issues remain unaddressed. GB Energy represents an opportunity for economic growth that can reduce our dependency on fossil fuels but is ignored.

Welcomes the measures taken by the Chancellor to support hard-working families, including a reduction in employee national insurance contributions from 12% to 8%, benefitting thousands of people. The Budget also addresses early learning and childcare with an increase in funding, enhancing teacher training for children's growth, addressing unfairness in child benefits, and extending the household support fund. Additionally, tax cuts for businesses through full expensing are encouraging investment and job creation.

The impact of the Budget on public services is significant. NHS waiting lists stand at 7.6 million patients, impacting more than 6 million people. The King’s Fund reported that those in deprived areas are twice as likely to wait over a year for treatment compared to affluent areas. In Oldham, there has been a significant increase in the cost of temporary accommodation from £1.9 million to £6 million over a few years. There are currently 500 children living in hotel accommodations under these conditions.

Critiques the UK Budget's failure to address challenges faced by former coalfield and industrial areas. Highlights unfair distribution of taxes, increasing council tax burden, and insufficient support for local councils. Advocates for a proportional property tax as an alternative solution. Points out outsourcing issues in social care and highlights other national issues affecting his constituency such as NHS problems, over-subscribed schools, lack of home-to-school transport, and poor school conditions.

We on the Labour Benches criticise the Conservatives for crashing our economy, sending mortgages up by £3,000 and rent up by 10%, with food prices rising by 25%. We also highlight Tory waste such as the Prime Minister's spending of £7 billion on covid loan fraud and £500 million on a Rwanda plan that has seen no asylum seekers relocated. Labour emphasises underinvestment in public services, including a record high NHS waiting list of over 7 million people, crumbling schools due to budget cuts, unsolved crimes, and rising child poverty. The party argues for a responsible approach focusing on economic growth, increased house building, clean energy transition, NHS expansion, police recruitment, and support for small businesses.

Fourteen years of Tory Government have led to a widening gap in health inequalities, increased child poverty, and reduced access to healthcare services. The north-east is expected to see the north-south life expectancy divide endure for decades due to systematic inequalities. Child poverty has risen from 56% to 67% among working families in less than a decade, with one in five children now living below the deep poverty line. There are also high rates of emergency hospital admissions and hospital admissions for asthma, diabetes, and dental treatment associated with higher levels of deprivation.

A decade after George Osborne's first Tory Budget, the UK is experiencing a recession with taxes at their highest point in 70 years. Living standards have fallen significantly, and average wages will not regain pre-2008 levels until 2026. The budget includes 25 tax increases, rising mortgage rates, soaring food bills, and stagnant wages. Public services are deteriorating due to lack of funding, with no support for victims of the contaminated blood scandal or Post Office scandal. The government is in chaos over plans to expand windfall taxes on oil and gas industries without proper funding. The SNP's budget raises taxes for lower-income earners while oil giants do not face increased taxation. Public services, especially healthcare, are suffering under the current economic conditions.

Critiques the Chancellor's Budget, stating that it fails to address rising living costs, stagnant wages, and high taxes. Emphasises the OBR’s figures indicating this will be the worst Parliament for living standards. Highlights how national insurance cuts benefit higher-paid workers at the expense of lower-paid ones, with constituents struggling under increased tax burdens. Discusses income inequality and public service strain, particularly focusing on mental health services and social care inadequacies. Calls for a deeper devolution deal but expresses dissatisfaction with current ambitions. Concludes by arguing that the Government is out of touch and requires a new approach.

The official unemployment rate is low because a record proportion of people are not in work. Our employment rate will be lower this year than forecasted and even lower in five years' time, indicating another five years of the Conservatives would worsen the situation. Economic inactivity is increasing, particularly among those with long-term sickness, young people due to mental health problems, and residents of northern towns and cities. The failure on work is a drag on the economy, growth, and living standards.

The Conservative government’s economic policy focuses on reducing unemployment, increasing national living wages, and lifting millions out of poverty. Since 2010, over 2.5 million more people are in work. The tax-free allowance has increased from £6,500 under Labour to over £12,500 now. Unemployment was near 8% when the Conservatives took power but is now around 4%. The government plans to cut NICs further and expand childcare offers, helping 60,000 parents enter the workforce by September 2025. Additionally, changes to the tax system will incentivise parents to increase work hours.

The Labour Party criticises the government for claiming that everything is fine when people have faced difficult times due to unemployment and other issues. Labour highlights the need to address young people with disabilities and older women who struggle to find work, questioning how the government proposes to get these individuals back into employment.

The OBR data shows that under Conservative Governments, pay increased by only £17 a week over 13 years compared to £183 per week during Labour's tenure. Labour argues that many of the jobs created are part of a low-wage economy, questioning whether these opportunities provide well-paid and secure work.

The Government's freeze on the personal tax allowance has brought more people into taxation. Labour questions how many individuals have been affected by this policy and its impact on low-income taxpayers.

The government’s decision to scrap non-dom status could generate an extra £6 billion in revenue, which Labour suggests could have funded free breakfast clubs for nearly 4.5 million children. This highlights the potential use of such funds in improving educational support.

The high-income child benefit charge anomaly where a single person earning £60,000 pays the charge but a couple earning £59,000 each does not is highlighted. There are calls for addressing this issue to ensure fairness.

Welcomes the government's commitment to move towards a household basis for taxation and recognises that most other countries, particularly in Europe, operate on such a basis. This approach acknowledges family obligations to dependants.

Inquired about the need for an equality impact assessment to understand how the Budget changes will affect women.

Asked if the Minister would give way, in support of Karin Smyth's inquiry regarding the impact on women from budget changes.