Publications / Guides

How does Parliament approve Government spending plans?

House of Commons Chamber, 7 March 2023. ©UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor
House of Commons Chamber, 7 March 2023. ©UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor

Approval of the Estimates (Main or Supplementary) comes first in the form of a Supply resolution. However, such resolutions have political force, but they are not law. Consequently, legislation is also required - in the form of a Supply and Appropriation Bill - before the departmental expenditure set out in the Estimates is legally authorised by Parliament.

When a Supply motion is agreed, it becomes a Supply resolution; it means that the House of Commons has considered the Government's spending plans and expressed support for them.

However, Supply resolutions are political not legal instruments. Legislation is also required before the departmental expenditure set out in the Estimates is legally authorised by Parliament.

This legislation takes the form of:

  • a Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) Act (for the Main Estimates); and

  • a Supply and Appropriation (Anticipation and Adjustments) Act (for the Supplementary Estimates and Vote on Account).

Supply motions can take two forms.

These are debated on Estimates Days on the recommendation of the Backbench Business Committee and Liaison Committee. The motions are usually tabled between one and four days after the proposals for Estimates Day debates have been approved by the House.

These provide for parliamentary approval of the other departmental Estimates (i.e. those which are not chosen for debate on Estimates Days).

MPs may propose a reduction in an Estimate selected for debate, via an amendment to a Supply motion of type 1 above. However, MPs cannot propose an increase in the Estimate. Only a Government minister may move a Supply motion, and the Government establishes the upper limit on spending, so any amendment to increase that limit is prohibited. This reflects the constitutional principle that only the Crown may initiate expenditure.

Because the Supply motions provide the foundation for subsequent legislation (which is subject to neither debate nor amendment) the form and content of the motions (and of any proposed amendments to them) are strictly policed. Once the motions are agreed as resolutions, they:

  • must provide a clear legal basis for action;

  • cannot cover matters unrelated to the Estimates;

  • cannot include statements of opinion; and

  • should not impose conditions on the authorisation of expenditure.

The approval of the Estimates must be clear and unambiguous, in relation to both the amounts involved and the purposes for which the spending is designated. Any amendment to the Estimates motions which does not meet these requirements will be deemed disorderly and is therefore unlikely to be selected. (The Speaker of the House of Commons does not have to set out reasons for his decisions on the selection of amendments.)

If the Government were to lose a vote on the Estimates, this would have political, but not necessarily constitutional, implications and consequences.

The Government can request approval of expenditure at any time. However, if approval of the Main Estimates is not sought before 5 August each year, then the Government cannot benefit from the abbreviated procedure set out in Standing Order No. 54 which enables all the Estimates to be approved in a single 'roll-up' motion. If approval is not sought before 5 August each departmental Estimate has to be approved separately. In practice, the 5 August deadline could be altered if MPs wished. A motion could be moved, for example, to amend the Standing Order and substitute a date other than 5 August for consideration of the Estimates in any given year. A motion could also amend the Standing Order provisions requiring the Speaker to put the questions 'forthwith'.

Such an approach has never been tested. MPs would have to weigh the political advantages of doing so against the risks involved in potentially withholding funding for critical economic and social programmes of benefit to their constituents. If MPs declined to approve the Main Estimates by August, then by early Autumn the government would likely run out of money, having used up the 45% advance funding secured through the earlier Vote on Account, and having exhausted all options to redeploy funds from other sources such as the Contingencies Fund or the National Insurance Fund.

The Supply motions, if approved, become resolutions of the House. These resolutions are the parliamentary foundation for:

  • the Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) Bill, which – when passed – provides formal statutory authority for the Main Estimates;

  • the Supply and Appropriation (Anticipation and Adjustments) Bill, which – when passed – provides formal statutory authority for the Supplementary Estimates and the Vote on Account.

Only once a Bill receives Royal Assent does the spending set out in the Estimates, and approved by Parliament, have legal effect. A Supply and Appropriation Bill is usually introduced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury once the House has resolved to support the Supply motions. The Bill is usually introduced immediately after the Supply motions are agreed, with Second Reading set for the following sitting day.

As the House has already agreed the Supply resolutions, a Supply and Appropriation Bill is not subject to debate or amendment at any stage. There is no Committee stage, and thus no Report stage, and under Standing Order No. 56 the questions on Second and Third Reading are put 'forthwith'. The Bill is certified as a Money Bill by the Speaker and goes to the House of Lords, where it is passed unamended (in accordance with the Parliament Act 1911). Once the Bill receives Royal Assent, the Government has the legislative approval necessary for the monies sought by each department to be released from the Consolidated Fund. Once enacted, the Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) Act and the Supply and Appropriation (Anticipation and Adjustments) Act provides the basis on which the National Audit Office will audit the Government’s accounts.

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 16-20 March 2026

The Defence Secretary, John Healey, will face questions from MPs. The Grenfell Tower (Memorial Expenditure) Bill and the Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill will be fast-tracked through all their Commons stages in a single day. MPs will debate online safety, an e-petition calling for automatic by-elections when MPs defect to another party, and the Conservative Party will choose the Opposition Day debate. The Justice Committee will hear from the Victims’ Commissioner on the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Public Accounts Committee will question officials about the Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster, and experts will give evidence on the Representation of the People Bill. In the Lords, Peers will continue scrutiny of the Crime and Policing, Pensions Schemes, and Finance (No. 2) Bills. Lord Arbuthnot will ask about Fujitsu contributing to compensation in the Post Office Horizon case, and Peers will debate terrorism, abortion, AI, and assisted dying.

15 Mar 2026
Read more

News / Jury trials under threat? The Courts and Tribunals Bill explained - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 136

Plans to restrict the right to a jury trial have cleared their Second Reading in the Commons, but the proposals in the Courts and Tribunals Bill face growing resistance, including from Labour rebels. We discuss the legal and constitutional implications with barrister Lord Macdonald of River Glaven, examining what the reforms could mean for defendants’ rights and the criminal courts system. We also assess the passage of legislation removing hereditary Peers from Parliament, and the late compromise that eased opposition in the House of Lords. Meanwhile Sir Lindsay Hoyle clashes with the Chief Whip over delays in the division lobby, and newly released papers on Peter Mandelson’s Washington appointment raise fresh political questions. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

13 Mar 2026
Read more

Briefings / Last-minute powers and limited scrutiny: Parliament and the risks of consigning online safety law to delegated legislation

Two late-stage government amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill would grant Ministers significant powers to reshape key parts of the Online Safety Act through delegated legislation. While the policy goals may attract support, the method raises serious constitutional concerns about parliamentary scrutiny and accountability. Using these amendments as a case study, this briefing explores the risks of relying on regulations to make policy and explains how the Hansard Society’s proposed reforms to the delegated legislation scrutiny system could better balance governmental flexibility with democratic oversight.

09 Mar 2026
Read more

News / Is the assisted dying bill being filibustered? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 135

Debate over the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has been so slow in the House of Lords that opponents of the Bill are accused of deliberately running down the clock. Conservative Peer Lord Harper rejects claims of filibustering, arguing that Peers are undertaking necessary scrutiny of a flawed and complex bill. He contends the legislation lacks adequate safeguards and was unsuited to the Private Member’s Bill process and discusses whether MPs might attempt to revive it in a future parliamentary Session. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

10 Mar 2026
Read more

Blog / The Backbench Business Committee 15 years on: Has it given backbench MPs a stronger voice in the House of Commons?

Fifteen years after its creation, the Backbench Business Committee has become an important mechanism through which MPs can secure debates and raise issues in the House of Commons. Drawing on new research analysing debate transcripts and interviews with MPs, Ministers and officials, this blogpost analyses the Committee’s impact on parliamentary agenda-setting and cross-party campaigning. It highlights how the Committee has transformed opportunities for backbenchers while identifying ongoing challenges around participation, transparency and the Committee’s potential role in representing backbench interests more broadly.

07 Mar 2026
Read more