What is the UK Spending Review and Parliament’s Role? Budget Differences, Approval Process, and Why It Matters

Blog

What role does Parliament play in the Spending Review?

9 Jun 2025

Rt Hon Rachel Reeves MP, The Chancellor of the Exchequer, 29 July 2024. Image credit: House of Commons

The UK Spending Review outlines how Government funds will be allocated over several years. Unlike the Budget, which raises revenue, the Review decides how it is spent. But how is it approved? What role does Parliament play if it doesn’t vote on the Review itself? This blog explores how the Spending Review works, how it differs from the Budget, and how Parliament holds the Government to account through the Estimates process.

,
Director , Hansard Society

Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox

Share this and support our work

What is a Spending Review, and why does it matter?

A Spending Review (SR) is the process by which the UK Government sets out its spending priorities and departmental budgets for the years ahead. Unlike the Budget, which is focused on raising money (primarily through taxation), the Spending Review is about how that money will be allocated across government departments and programmes.

The upcoming Spending Review will cover the financial years 2026-27 to 2028-29 for resource spending, and extends to 2029-30 for capital investment. It is a critical tool for shaping public services, setting out the Departmental Expenditure Limits (DELs) for each department. These DELs are divided into:

Resource DEL (RDEL): day-to-day running costs such as salaries, supplies, and administration; and
Capital DEL (CDEL): investment in assets like infrastructure, equipment, and buildings.

Does Parliament approve the Spending Review?

When the Chancellor presents the Spending Review, it is in the form of an oral statement to which no immediate parliamentary approval procedure is attached. Unlike the Budget – where MPs debate formal Budget resolutions over several days, which then form the basis for the Finance Bill – MPs can only question the Chancellor following her oral statement.

After the Chancellor’s statement, Select Committees and individual MPs may scrutinise the plans further using the usual parliamentary mechanisms of inquiries and evidence sessions, questions to ministers, adjournment or backbench debates, and so on.

However, the House of Commons will play a crucial role in approving the departmental expenditure plans through the Estimates cycle when the Government formally makes a request for the money each financial year.

Later this month the House of Commons will be asked to approve the Main Estimates for departmental spending in the current financial year, which will form the basis for this year’s Supply and Appropriation Bill. These Estimates were laid before Parliament on 15 May and will be debated and voted on by MPs on 24 and 25 June. They relate to funding decisions outlined in the Chancellor’s Budget Statement in October 2024 for the current financial year, preceding the Spending Review period.

The spending outlined in the Spending Review will thus emerge in next year’s Estimates process as set out below:

Vote on Account - likely in February 2026: the Government will seek approval of around 45% of departmental budgets before the start of the 2026-27 financial year on 1 April; and
Main Estimates – in late Spring/early Summer 2026: the Government will present the balance of the annual expenditure limits for each department. When approved, these Estimates will form the basis of the Supply and Appropriation Bill, which enshrines the spending in law.

The Hansard Society’s guide to how Parliament debates and approves Government spending provides more information on the Estimates process.

How much public spending does the Spending Review actually cover?

The Spending Review is not comprehensive. According to the House of Commons Library, it covers about 40% of total public expenditure. This includes planned spending that departments can control and negotiate in advance.

Excluded from the SR is Annually Managed Expenditure (AME) – spending that fluctuates with demand, which includes pensions, welfare benefits and debt interest payments.

Because this spending is inherently unpredictable, it is handled separately and reviewed annually.

How is the Spending Review different from the Budget or the Spring Statement?

The Budget is about taxation and raising revenue. It may include some spending measures, but its core function is to outline how money will be collected through taxation (known as “charges on the people”) or other measures to fund the Government’s spending plans.

The Spring Statement is an update on the state of the economy, including new forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). It addresses the economic outlook over the course of the Parliament and may set out the need for adjustments to future plans.

In contrast, the Spending Review focuses on dividing up the Government-wide total spending pot by department and determining how each department should then allocate their money to specific policies to address the Government’s ‘missions’, manifesto commitments and departmental objectives. The division of money is determined through a negotiation process led by Ministers and their departmental teams engaging directly with the Treasury.

Can the Government change the Spending Review after it’s announced?

In theory, the SR sets out firm spending limits for the agreed period. But in practice, these figures are not carved in stone. Political pressures, economic shocks, or national emergencies can lead to significant revisions.

Moreover, because AME (which makes up most of the spending) is not controlled by the Spending Review, a large portion of Government spending remains outside the SR’s scope, making spending deviations common.

Does the Government have to hold a Spending Review?

No, it is not a constitutional or parliamentary requirement. The tradition of multi-year Spending Reviews was introduced by Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown in 1998. Since then, SRs have been held irregularly, often shaped by the political and economic climate. Recent reviews took place in 2010, 2013, 2015, 2019 and 2021.

That said, under the Charter for Budget Responsibility (which was updated by this Government in January 2025), the Government now commits to holding a Spending Review at least every two years, covering at least three financial years each time. This framework, backed by the National Audit Act 2011, will ensure a degree of regularity and parliamentary scrutiny of the plans.

Latest / Highlights

Blog / Treaty scrutiny: addressing the accountability gap

In this guest blog, Lord Goldsmith KC, Chair of the House of Lords International Agreements Committee (IAC), sets out the findings of the Committee’s latest report urging reform of Parliament's outdated system for scrutinising treaties. The report warns that Westminster lags behind other legislatures in overseeing these vital policy instruments. Rejecting successive governments' defence of the status quo, it argues that government objections to reform are unconvincing and meaningful accountability is overdue.

News / Assisted dying bill - special series #17: Peers give the Bill a Second Reading, but progress is paused for committee evidence - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 107

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has cleared another key hurdle: it was given a Second Reading in the House of Lords without a formal vote. But Peers have agreed to set up a special select committee to hear evidence from Ministers, professional bodies and legal experts before the Bill goes any further. That decision pushes the detailed clause-by-clause scrutiny back to mid-November and could shape the Bill’s prospects in unexpected ways. In this episode we explore the procedural twists and political manoeuvring behind that decision. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / Assisted dying bill - special series #16: The Bill makes its debut in the House of Lords - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 106

As Peers embark on a marathon two-day Second Reading debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill – the measure that would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales – we are joined by former Clerk of the Parliaments, Sir David Beamish, to decode the drama. With more than two hundred members of the House of Lords lining up to speak, Sir David explains why, despite the intensity of the arguments, no one expects the Bill to be rejected at this stage. Instead, the real fight will come later, after Peers get into the clause-by-clause detail and see what defects can be remedied. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

Briefings / The assisted dying bill: A guide to the legislative process in the House of Lords

Having passed through the House of Commons, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill - the Bill to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales - must now go through its legislative stages in the House of Lords. This guide explains the special procedures for legislation in the House of Lords, and for Private Members’ Bills in particular. It answers some frequently asked questions, including how Peers might block the Bill, and gives an explanation of each stage of the process, from Second to Third Reading.

Briefings / Delegated powers in the assisted dying bill: Issues for the attention of the House of Lords

Like many pieces of primary legislation, the assisted dying bill leaves much of the practical and policy detail to be worked out later by Ministers through regulations. After the Bill’s Second Reading in the House of Commons, we published a briefing which drew attention to two of its delegated powers. But since then the Bill has been heavily amended, prompting new questions: how have its delegated powers evolved, do these changes strengthen or weaken the approach to the delegation of ministerial power, and are further amendments needed and if so, why?