Publications / Guides

How do MPs scrutinise the Budget?

Tulip Siddique MP in the House of Commons Chamber, 8 June 2022. ©UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor
Tulip Siddique MP in the House of Commons Chamber, 8 June 2022. ©UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor

The Financial Statement is usually followed by four days of debate on the Budget, each day's debate focusing on specific policy areas. The debate enables the House of Commons to consider the government’s proposals for charges, the role that these charges play in the context of the tax system as a whole, and whether the revenue raised is sufficient given the government’s expenditure plans.

~

Before the Chancellor of the Exchequer rises to make his speech, a government Whip moves a motion for an ‘unopposed return’, whereby the House requires the production of Budget documents. A motion in the form of a Humble Address to His Majesty is generally used when the House requests papers from a government department, headed by a Secretary of State. However, the Chancellor is not a Secretary of State and so the motion takes a different form.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s speech is then heard without interruption. Exceptionally, there is also no question and answer period following the Chancellor’s Statement.

Once the Statement is concluded, two motions are moved formally:

  • a motion for the provisional collection of taxes; and

  • a Ways and Means motion on which the debate will begin.

The Leader of the Opposition is the first speaker called in the debate and is also heard without interruption. The Leader of the third-largest party, who speaks later in the debate, is also heard without interruption when his or her turn comes.

Any former Prime Minister, any former Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Chair of the Treasury Select Committee and Public Accounts Committee will almost certainly be called to speak early in the debate, if they wish to do so. (In the 2021 Budget debate a call list of speakers was made available in advance. This procedural change was necessitated by the arrangements for the virtual Parliament during the pandemic.)

The budget debate has a theme or themes (health, education, housing, etc) for each day, chosen by the government.

The Shadow Chancellor opens the debate on day two, and a relevant Secretary of State opens the debate on the remaining days, depending on the theme or themes for the day.

There are no winding-up speeches on the first day of debate. A Treasury Minister winds up the debate on the subsequent debate days.

The wide-ranging, topic-based organisation of the budget debate is to enable the House to consider not just the government’s proposals for charges, as set out in the Ways and Means resolutions, but also the role that these charges play in the context of the tax system as a whole, and whether the revenue raised by the proposed charges is sufficient given the government’s expenditure plans and the wider state of the economy.

08:06 am, 14 March 2023

Hansard Society (2022), How does Parliament authorise the Government's taxation plans? A procedural guide to the Budget process, (Hansard Society: London)

News / Parliament gagged by super-injunction? A conversation with Joshua Rozenberg - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 101

Legal expert Joshua Rozenberg joins us this week to unpack the legal and constitutional ramifications of one of the most troubling intersections of government secrecy, national security, and parliamentary accountability in recent memory. Thousands of Afghans who had worked with British forces were placed at risk of Taliban revenge attacks after a catastrophic government data leak in 2022 exposed their details. In response, ministers secured a “super-injunction” – so secret that even its existence could not be reported – effectively silencing public debate and preventing parliamentary scrutiny for almost two years. The breach, only revealed this week, led to a covert resettlement scheme which has already cost taxpayers millions of pounds. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

18 Jul 2025
Read more

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.

11 Jul 2025
Read more

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.

04 Jul 2025
Read more

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.

27 Jun 2025
Read more

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.

03 Jun 2025
Read more