AG°Ù¼ÒÀÖÔÚÏß¹ÙÍø

The chancellor has unveiled her long-awaited spending review, which sets out detailed plans for how individual government departments are funded over the next three years.

Rachel Reeves says departmental budgets will grow by an average of 2.3% a year, prioritising health, defence, and infrastructure projects - but how will this be paid for? And how does this help working people?

Our political correspondent Tamara Cohen speaks to economics and data editor Ed Conway about the ambitious figures.

Thanks for your question - here's nice straightforward answer from our political reporter Tim Baker:

All pensioners will get the payment, and anyone over the threshold of £35,000 will have to pay it back as tax - this will be done automatically. 

The benefit is tax-free.

Thanks for your question.

You're right to point out that we don't have any costed commitments to hit the defence spending target proposed by the US.

That's 5% of national income, or GDP.

Sir Keir Starmer has committed to getting to 2.5% by 2027 - you'll recall that was done by controversially cutting the aid budget.

He's said he hopes to get to 3% during the next parliament. So, well beyond the purview of yesterday's spending review, which takes us to 2029 and the next general election.

'Chunky' tax rises likely required

If the government does want to hit 3% or more, it may have to rework its budgets again (like it slashed foreign aid) or potentially raise taxes.

Just last week, our political correspondent Tamara Cohen reported the price tag of a rise to 3.5%, from 2.5%, would be £30bn a year. 

Paul Johnson, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, told her "chunky" tax rises would be required unless economic growth really took off.

Given how bleak things can feel, and the fair amount of scepticism we've reported today about the chancellor's spending plans, we thought we'd share some of your more positive and optimistic correspondence about what she announced yesterday.

Jay is pleased to see the NHS and housing getting lots of money put behind them, given they were election priorities for Labour last year.

Spending on infrastructure and transport will also have an impact, he says, "and it was right to focus on places beyond London".

"It will take time but will transform communities," he adds. "That can only be a good thing."

Robert is also a fan of the government's approach.

"About time someone looked long-term rather than look for short-term popularity," he says, which is certainly the argument the prime minister has made since winning power.

Whether it eventually helps him in the polls remains to be seen.

Thanks for your question, Flint.

Our political reporter Tim Baker says:

The spending review doesn't tend to give us a huge amount of detail on how money will come in - more how it is spent. 

To find out what the government is expecting to make will come in the budget in the autumn. 

However, the money allocated yesterday is what the government already expects to make from tax, so it doesn't need to find it. 

There has been some debate that the way government calculates the expected return from public investments is flawed. 

The guidelines - known as the Treasury Green Book - are being reformed, placing more emphasis upon the geographical location of new projects, with the idea seeming to be that plans outside London will get a boost.

For example, Rachel Reeves has announced billions for transport projects outside the capital:

The chancellor's spending review seems to make the assumption that councils across the country are going to be raising council tax by 5% every year over the coming years.

Many are strapped for cash and have been under significant financial pressures for a long time - but is having to house migrants to blame?

Our political reporter Tim Baker says:

The short answer to this is no.

In a few more words, council budgets have struggled massively from being cut since 2010. 

The biggest cost for councils is social care, and this is continuing to rise. 

Local finances have also struggled with things like increasing interest rates. 

Data also shows white British people make up a large majority of social housing lettings, and applications are treated on a need basis and not on ethnicity. 

Finally, the funding for asylum seeker hotels comes from central government. The chancellor claims ending the use of them by 2029 will save the taxpayer £1bn a year.

Thanks for your question.

The chancellor's announcements yesterday - a few billion pounds here, another billion or so there - might make you think the country is absolutely flush with cash.

Of course, the economy is not actually in great shape, but Labour hope borrowing to invest in infrastructure will pay off.

Our political reporter Tim Baker explains:

This is a bet the government is making - politics is all about choices, and everyone will have a different idea of what the "best" decision is. 

Labour are hoping that by spending money and investing in building, they can stimulate growth and therefore grow the economy. 

Other people will think differently, but it's hard to know the "right" answer.

We've had the Home Office's figures regarding yesterday's small boat crossings - 400 people crossed the Channel in six vessels.

It follows migrants being photographed being brought to shore on a Border Force vessel yesterday.

According to official data, these are the first migrants to cross the Channel in at least eight days, with the past week seeing no recorded arrivals. 

Thanks for your question, Jeff.

You're right that benefit cuts weren't part of the chancellor's spending review yesterday, but they are still going ahead as things stand despite mounting criticism from backbench MPs.

As our political correspondent Tamara Cohen reported last night, the work and pensions secretary has said she won't back down.

Liz Kendall says restricting personal independence payments (PIP) and the health top-up to universal credit will save £5bn.

'We must change course'

Responding to a letter from the Work and Pensions Committee asking for the changes to be delayed pending a full assessment of the impact on employment, poverty, and health, Kendall said that wasn't possible.

She said the bill needs final approval from parliament by November if changes are to take effect in 2026, with "urgent action" required.

She wrote: "With one in eight young people now not in education, employment or training and nearly 2.8 million people out of work due to long-term sickness, and spending on health and disability benefits set to rise by an additional £18bn, we must change course.

"We have consistently been clear that we are not consulting on every proposal. Instead, parliament will have the opportunity to fully debate, propose amendments to, and vote on areas where we have announced urgent reforms that are not subject to consultation."

Despite the concerns of dozens of Labour MPs, the government's big majority means the bill will almost certainly pass.

The government's benefit cuts explained

The government says the PIP caseload has more than doubled from 15,000 new claims per month in 2019 to 34,000. PIP is a benefit to help disabled people with the increased costs of day-to-day living.

Claimants will need to achieve four points out of eight in their assessment to qualify for the benefit, and the government says some 370,000 existing claimants will lose out when reassessed.

The more points a person gets, the more money they receive. For example, an applicant gets two points on the daily living score if they need to use an aid or appliance when cooking a meal, or will get eight points if they cannot prepare food or cook at all.

Reform UK's efforts to examine the accounts of councils are being blocked by the Conservatives, the party has claimed.

Nigel Farage's party has formed a so-called Reform UK DOGE unit to audit councils it won last month, inspired by Elon Musk's work in the US.

For context: The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has sought to slash government spending by cutting back environmental schemes and diversity initiatives. It was named after a meme.

Musk promised to save the US taxpayer $2trn, but shortly before he left the White House, he had scaled this back to $150bn. In fact, the US government has spent $190bn more than the same period last year.

Reform have taken inspiration from thisâ€� glowing success. 

They've created their own DOGE and appointed a chair, who had successfully run multiple businesses. 

But he resigned in solidarity with Zia Yusuf (then chair of the party), with both men quitting last Thursday. 

Skip forward 48-hours and Yusuf was back, pinching the job of DOGE chair (now vacant) for himself. 

Anyway, where were we�

Now, Yusuf has claimed the Tories are trying to block Reform DOGE's unelected officials from being able to access the council's accounts. 

He said: "The failed Tory party, fighting for its existence, has written to the ICO [Information Commissioner's Office] to try to block Reform’s DOGE.

"They are desperate to cover up the corruption and waste of their now deposed local government regimes. It will not work."

Yusuf added the Tories "plundered hundreds of millions" from the taxpayer during COVID, and "they have done the same at councils".

Reform won seats on the pledge to cut waste and crackdown on fraud, he said, and with the help of DOGE, "they will do just that".

Reform has begun with Kent County Council, though the party said it doesn't know how long auditing the local authority will take.