Healey’s Budget offered 98 measures, but most had little fiscal impact

Chancellor John Healey’s Budget contained 98 measures, but most were small in their effect on the public finances, BBC political editor Chris Mason says. He described it as a cautious package, as high debt, taxes and borrowing costs left the government with limited room to make a visible difference to household finances.

The measures were set out in the Budget’s Red Book, alongside the Office for Budget Responsibility’s economic and fiscal outlook. Mason said the package was smaller overall in tax and spending terms than several recent Budgets, despite having more individual measures than either of Rachel Reeves’s Budgets.

The government has ruled out raising income tax, National Insurance and VAT, the biggest revenue-raising taxes, and has instead targeted savers, landlords and banks. Mason noted the political risk of choosing sectors likely to object, as happened with the previous government’s proposed inheritance-tax changes for farmers.

Households face persistent financial pressures, while the OBR said the UK’s economic and fiscal position remained “very challenging”. It also warned that the outlook was uncertain, with significantly better or worse outcomes broadly equally likely. High national debt, inflation and interest rates add to the constraints, Mason wrote.

The government hopes smaller initiatives will offer practical help and give Labour MPs measures to promote. Luke Tryl, UK director of the More in Common think tank, said the Budget’s “softly populist tone” was likely to appeal to the public. He pointed to support for people in council tax bands A to D, alongside taxes on banks, landlords, gambling companies and vape shops.

Opposition parties criticised the Budget as thin. The government argues it is one part of a wider programme, including plans on employment and benefits, a long-term vision for relations with the European Union and Andy Burnham’s 10-year agenda.

Mason’s assessment was that the Budget was cautious: a series of modest interventions rather than a major change in the country’s economic direction.