At the spring forecast last week, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor showed that we have the right economic plan. Our plan has lowered inflation, borrowing, debt and debt interest payments. Our approach means that investment is up, helping to create the conditions for growth across the UK. Our firm approach to public spending is helping to keep public finances on a sustainable path.
Given that the Chancellor has pencilled in 0.3% real-terms growth in public spending in 2029-30, and assuming that health spending is at its historical average, the special educational needs and disabilities spend is as per the proposals, and defence is at 3%, that will leave a 2.5% real-terms cut in unprotected Departments. What plans do the Chancellor and Chief Secretary to the Treasury have to fill that £13 billion gap in the 2029-30 envelope?
If the right hon. Gentleman looks at the plans that we set out through our spending review, he will be clear that we are increasing spending by £50 billion a year by 2028-29 compared with the previous Government’s plans. At the same time, we are ensuring that taxpayers get value for money. We are making £3.9 billion of efficiency savings by 2029-30, rising to £5 billion by 2030-31.
I call the shadow Minister.
The Government’s spending plans look very, very iffy. The Minister has a chance of fitting in with the Chancellor’s fiscal rules—if there is no further downgrade on economic growth, which seems unlikely; if the Government have the backbone to rein in public spending and to increase taxes in the last years of the Parliament, which seems very unlikely; if the Government do not have to step in with any significant energy support because no money has been set aside; and if the Government can get £4.8 billion in salary sacrifice in 2029-30 revenues, which the industry says is a pipe dream. So here is another “if”. If the Minister’s spending plans start to fall apart, will he prioritise cuts in public spending over tax increases?
I will give the hon. Gentleman an “if”. If he were honest and remembered his time in Liz Truss’s Government, he might not have the gall to make comments like that across the Dispatch Box—
Order. All Members are honest. Please think about what you are saying. You cannot individually attack a Member for not being honest. We are all honourable Members, as you well know. I call the honourable Minister.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I apologise unreservedly for the implication about the hon. Gentleman: I know that he is a very decent and honourable man, and I withdraw that comment. He may have unintentionally misled the House by failing to declare his part in the Liz Truss Government and the impact that that had on public spending. As he will know, we have stuck to the fiscal rules that this Chancellor introduced at the beginning of this Government in every fiscal event that we have had. Those fiscal rules are ironclad. We have sustainable plans for public spending, and we are ensuring that we are managing the economy in a way that the hon. Gentleman’s party could only dream of.