Personal news, as they say… I’m honoured and excited to be appointed Chief Executive of the Nuffield Foundation (starting in January 2025). It’s such an important institution with a vital mission, great team & huge role to play in the years ahead. https://t.co/4WLs64m2sZ

Delighted that Ruth Curtice will be the next Chief Executive of @resfoundation. Ruth is a great talent who will thrive at RF. I’ll leave knowing we have a brilliant leader to take the organisation and its wonderful team into a new era. https://t.co/sjLgX2ca2u

This is maintaining a significantly higher level of spending than would have occurred under the previous administration's proposed (& implausible) cuts. But that is a very different thing.

Keep reading/hearing the Budget results in a ‘massive expansion of the state’. Hang on. Here’s what is actually happening to overall public expenditure.

Have been saying this a lot over recent days.....

Increased employer NICs, together with (welcome) strengthening of employee protection, means other steps must be taken to close the tax gap between employees & self-employed. Dealing with single worker status becomes more important. This can’t be kicked to a future parliament.

With so much focus on public investment/debt rule, there is a slight risk that the scale of the challenge on day-to-day spending is understated in the current debate.

For all the detail on the budget context and key choices read this briefing by the excellent @carapacitti.bsky.social @emilyfry.bsky.social @jamessmithrf.bsky.social https://t.co/EbrARrkMSe

Bigger picture: it's a brutal context for a first Budget – there's nothing left to cut & big increases in taxes on stagnant incomes is just very hard - don’t let anyone suggest otherwise.

Which makes budget framing & expectation management really tricky: one person’s ‘ending austerity’ is another's ‘preserving today’s threadbare post-austerity level of spend for the rest of the Parliament’.

Given a modest current surplus is projected over medium term, this would take ~£35bn of tax rises (assuming current, tiny levels of ‘headroom’ are maintained). Again, this still wouldn't secure real increases for key public services like councils, courts, prisons etc.

- NHS rises with historic norm; education = flat real; defence = flat as % GDP; + - fix the 'overspend' = £20bn (netting off cuts to WFP); + - prevent further cuts to unprotected depts = ~£23bn+ - £5bn for manifesto revenue commitments Would mean c.£48bn of extra spending..

Simply to avoid further cuts to unprotected public services that are already on their knees, while meeting the (sensible) golden rule, will require some chunky tax rises. The numbers are fiddly, rough & likely to change with new OBR forecast, but...

With so much focus on public investment/debt rule, there is a slight risk that the scale of the challenge on day-to-day spending is understated in the current debate.

What a great appointment to a vital role.

Link to the note:

Also, this stuff is seriously fiddly with lots of measurement/technical issues. If there is going to be a significant shift I do hope they set a direction then consult on the details and take the time needed to get it right.

My own view is that we'd probably be better off with 'golden rule' + small set of indicators focussed on sustainability the OBR would be required to report on (net worth, debt, servicing etc) as no one rule can bear the weight. But that might be too big a big shift in one go...

You are going to be hearing an awful lot about different possible fiscal rules over the next 4 weeks, so worth reading this short explainer by the excellent @JamesSmithRF @carapacitti

If you are old enough to remember the NF spreading hate & fear in your town's high street, and outside the school gate, then it strikes such a chord.

What a fine, moving, personal piece by @anandMenon1. Going to (try to) make my kids read this. https://t.co/e6FYkbPUcc