£22 billion financial 'black hole': What is Parliament's role?

News

£22 billion financial 'black hole': What is Parliament's role? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 44

2 Aug 2024

©House of Commons

This week's bruising Commons exchange between the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and the man she replaced at the Treasury, Jeremy Hunt, is just the opening encounter in what promises to be a long running parliamentary battle over the state of the public finances. MPs can expect to be asked to approve extra spending Estimates in the autumn, and there'll be a Budget and a full-scale Comprehensive Spending Review as well.

LISTEN

But why were MPs asked to approve £1.04 trillion in extra spending in July, without ministers pointing out that they believed the departmental budgets on which the spending was based to be dangerously flawed? And why the rush to push that extra spending through before the summer holidays.... Ruth reveals the link to a Victorian decision to ensure that gentlemen MPs could start their grouse-shooting on the Glorious 12th.

Plus, the carve-up of select committee chairs between the parties has been announced, with most going to Labour, while the Conservatives will provide the chair of the Home Affairs Committee (a good vantage point from which to attack the Government on immigration) while the Lib Dems will provide the Chair of Health and Social Care (perhaps foreshadowing a cross party deal on Social Care?). And does the decision to scrap the European Scrutiny Committee mean MPs won't be able to monitor important changes in Britain's relationship with the EU?

With more than a thousand new bag-carriers set to be hired by MPs to work with them in Parliament, Ruth and Mark talk to union rep Max Freedman, who has just stepped down after 15 years chairing the Unite staff branch in Parliament about the perils and rewards of being a Westminster aide - cautioning that the reality is far from the glamour depicted in shows like the ‘West Wing’.

← Back to Parliament Matters homepage

Listen on our YouTube channel (auto-captioned)

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Our guest

Max Freedman

Max Freedman was the chair of the Parliamentary and Constituency Staff Branch of Unite the Union, a trade union branch representing MPs' staff, from 2009 until 2024. In his time as Chair, the branch has dealt with issues relating to the creation of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA), and secured several wins for Members' staff, including higher redundancy payments, automatic annual uplifts in staff budgets, a commitment to equal employment benefits when moving between MPs, a 24/7 confidential staff helpline, and the creation of the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (ICGS).

What we talked about on this episode

Should the Government have informed Parliament earlier last week about its concerns with the Main Estimates?
Why was there no debate and vote on over £1 trillion of government spending?
Could the Government have taken a different approach to presentation of the Main Estimates?
Why did the Chancellor say the Main Estimates needed to be approved before the Summer recess?
What has grouse-shooting on the Glorious 12th got to do with parliamentary approval of government spending?
How can the Government address any 'black hole' in the nation's finances?
What does the carve-up of select committee chairs between the parties tell us?
Who are the potential candidates for the key committees?
How will the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives utilise their parliamentary talent: as select committee chairs or frontbench spokespeople?
Why has the European Scrutiny Committee been abolished?
How will European matters be scrutinised by MPs?
What do new staff working for new MPs need to know about Westminster?
What skills and experience do those working for an MP need?

Resources

Hansard Society

Transcript

Please note, this transcript is automatically generated. There are consequently minor errors and the text is not formatted according to our style guide. If you wish to reference or cite the transcript copy below, please first check against the audio version above. Timestamps are provided at the start of each minute.

You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety.org.uk/pm. 00:00:17:10 - 00:00:55:14 Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy. Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox and I'm Mark D'Arcy. Coming up this week. Money, money, money. Rachel Reeves draws the Commons dividing lines for the coming years. Dividing the spoils. What the share out of select committee chairs tells us about politics to come. And as Westminster prepares to welcome a new generation of parliamentary bag-carriers, a veteran Commons aide reminds them this ain't the West Wing. 00:00:55:16 - 00:01:29:08 But first, Ruth, it's got to be the starting point, I suppose. Rachel Reeves, this big statement to the House about the financial legacy of the previous Conservative government was exactly as billed, really. A massive exercise in pointing the finger of blame and the blame game produced some pretty sparky exchanges with the man she replaced in the Exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, about how much Labour knew about the state of the country's books before the election, and whether or not Rachel Reeves was, in effect, preparing the ground to break some of the promises she'd made about public spending and tax cuts 00:01:29:08 - 00:01:47:19 during that campaign. Yes, 22 billion pound black hole, she claims. Now, unless you've discovered some accountancy skills in the last week that I don't know about, I don't think either of us are in a position to judge who's right and who's wrong in all of this? But it will come out in the wash because eventually they will have to settle the books. 00:01:47:19 - 00:02:08:08 Parliament will have to approve additional spending if necessary if there is this black hole. But it's a pretty serious claim. And as you said, Jeremy Hunt and Rachel Reeves had some fairly harsh clashes. Jeremy Hunt isn't exactly Mr. Ferocious. No, he's normally the kind of person who, alright, can put the dagger in, but in a very sort of parliamentarian kind of way. 00:02:08:13 - 00:02:30:07 But there was visible angst and irritation. And in the middle of the chamber here. But this is central to the politics of the coming months. Now, Labour, if it has to take nasty decisions, wants them to be very firmly blamed on the previous government, not on themselves. And they also need to prepare their troops for those nasty decisions, which will come up in all sorts of Commons votes in the coming months as well.

Use the links below to subscribe to the Hansard Society's Parliament Matters podcast on your preferred app, or search for 'Parliament Matters' on whichever podcasting service you use. If you are unable to find our podcast, please email us here.

Apple

YouTube Podcasts

Spotify

More ways to subscribe

Parliament Matters homepage

Latest / Highlights

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 14-18 July 2025

MPs will consider a rare privilege motion relating to a request from the Omagh Bombing inquiry, while the Conservatives will choose the topic for Tuesday’s Opposition Day debate. Select Committees will question Cabinet Ministers on welfare reform, the NHS Plan, foreign policy, national security, and policy announcements made first to the media rather than Parliament. The Deprivation of Citizenship Orders Bill will complete its Commons stages. Peers will scrutinise bills on renters’ rights, employment, and planning. MPs will debate Statutory Instruments on media mergers, murder sentencing, and energy costs, and will vote on extending interest registration rules for MPs’ staff. Backbench MPs will lead debates on giving every child the best start in life, the Global Plastics Treaty and end of life care. The House of Lords will debate the Strategic Defence Review. → We value your thoughts. Please click here to let us know what you think of the Parliament Matters Bulletin in our reader survey.

News / One year on: How is Parliament performing? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 100

In our 100th episode, we take stock of Parliament one year after the 2024 general election. With a fractured opposition, a dominant Labour government, and a House of Commons still governed by rules designed for a two-party system, how well is this new Parliament really functioning? Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / Labour's welfare meltdown - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 99

It’s been a bruising week for the Government, as a Labour backbench revolt forced ministers to gut their own welfare reforms live in the House of Commons. We explore why Sir Keir Starmer appears to have such a poor grip on parliamentary management. Plus, House of Lords reform expert Professor Meg Russell explains why the hereditary peers bill may be a once-in-a-generation chance to tackle deeper issues — like curbing prime ministerial patronage and reducing the bloated size of the upper chamber. And in Dorking, faith and politics collide over assisted dying. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / What Westminster gets wrong about the NHS - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 98

We are joined this week by two guests who bring invaluable insight into the intersection of health policy and parliamentary life. Dr. Sarah Wollaston and Steve Brine – both former MPs, health policy experts, and co-hosts of the podcast Prevention is the New Cure – share their experiences of how the House of Commons handles health and social care. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

Submissions / Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties - Our evidence to the House of Lords International Agreements Committee

Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.