Chancellor again declines to say if benefits will rise in line with inflation

It comes as the Government U-turned on plans to cut the top rate of income tax for the highest earners.

03 October 2022

The Chancellor has again declined to say whether benefits will be increased in line with inflation, as the Government U-turned on plans to cut the top rate of income tax for the highest earners.

Kwasi Kwarteng said he is “not committed to any spending” during an interview on LBC radio on Monday morning.

Failing to keep pace with rising prices would leave some of the poorest households facing a real-terms cut in their incomes.

It comes as the Government dramatically dropped its plans to abolish the 45% rate on earnings over £150,000 following widespread criticism.

Pressed on the issue of benefits uprating, Mr Kwarteng told LBC: “I’m not going to comment on spending today.

“What we are focused on is the growth plan, we have got a medium-term plan which will set out more spending policies in the near future.”

Chief Secretary to the Treasury Chris Philp also declined to say whether benefits will be uprated in line with inflation next year.

He told ITV’s Good Morning Britain he was not going to “pre-empt” the statutory process led by the Work and Pensions Secretary which will happen in autumn, with a decision announced to parliament “in the normal way”.

In May this year, then-chancellor Rishi Sunak said benefits would be uprated by this September’s Consumer Prices Index (CPI), subject to a review by the Work and Pensions Secretary.

Last week, charities said they were shocked and horrified at the possibility that benefits may not be increased in line with inflation, and urged the Government to honour Mr Sunak’s promise.

Former cabinet minister Michael Gove told Times Radio said he would need “a lot of persuading” to stop benefits from rising in line with inflation.

But he said he would not want to “prejudge an argument” before seeing it, as sometimes in crises Governments have to “embrace policies that would in other circumstances be deeply unattractive”.

Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said on Monday it would be “grotesque” not to increase benefits in line with inflation.

She said: “The idea that the Government can afford to give tax cuts to the wealthiest, but not uprate benefits in line with inflation, I think is grotesque.

“And there are many people who are saying that the Government needs to rethink this one as well.”

She added that the Government needs not just to reverse the budget, but to “rethink the whole idea of trickle-down economics, which is causing huge anxiety and sent the markets into a panic”.

Katy Chakrabortty, head of policy and advocacy at Oxfam GB, said: “We are pleased that the Government has stopped, listened and understood that cutting taxes for the richest during a cost-of-living crisis is not the way to go.

“It needs to keep listening and provide urgent support to people facing poverty in the UK and those facing famine in other parts of the world.

“It is essential that ministers don’t seek to balance the books on the backs of people struggling to pay the bills and feed their families – public services, welfare and aid are all needed now more than ever.”

An announcement on changes to benefits levels is usually made in November, taking into account earnings and price data from September, and coming into effect the following April.

The Social Security Administration Act 1992 sets out that, if prices have increased over the review period, they should increase certain benefits by at least this rate for the next tax year.

They may also increase other benefits if they deem it appropriate, “having regard to the national economic situation and any other matters” they consider relevant.

However, the legislation says the Government is not required to increase benefits by an amount that “would be inconsiderable”.

More from Perspective

Get a free copy of our print edition


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Fill out this field
Fill out this field
Please enter a valid email address.
You need to agree with the terms to proceed

Your email address will not be published. The views expressed in the comments below are not those of Perspective. We encourage healthy debate, but racist, misogynistic, homophobic and other types of hateful comments will not be published.