Great article and analysis. I see nothing mentioned in her review for social care, public ownership.
My question is who will be building “affordable” homes and how is the government defining affordable?
Are they sticking with the Tory nonsense of affordable or have they redefined?
But delivery is about tangible results, something that people can see feel, own. If people’s experiences are just that then great. But I can’t help but get a little pessimistic
I object to the presentation of policies as "achievements" when none of them has happened; the opposition seem too wet to call that out. They are wishes, nothing more.
"A whopping £30 billion for nuclear energy, £14.2 billion of which has already been announced for Sizewell C, which is seeking to replicate the astronomically over-budget and absurdly delayed shambles at Hinkley Point C, a project that’s set to be not just the most expensive nuclear power station ever, but also the most expensive infrastructure project on planet Earth!"
To be fair - the Tories estimated this at over £20 Billion so this makes Reeves' budget look like a bargain in comparison. /S
How on Earth all those nuclear reactors get built in Germany and France, I have no idea... must have cost them a fortune. Oh, wait...
I made more or less the same notes that you did. Except that she gave no details at all about her decisions, or how she arrived at her priorities. And then said nothing about where the colossal sums of money would come from - when we were all led to believe there was an insuperable "black hole" and that if she didn't mess about with winter fuel - there was likely to be a run on the pound! I had a re-read of a long out of print, now very dated, econonics book I co-wrote in the early 70s "Making Sense of Economics" (Fontana 1974) - which has loads of basic stuff she seems to forget continually. And I really think saying she has stabilised the economy, without saying what she means - and not knowing what will happen in the next year or so - is ludicrous. I won't go on!
Top of your list of the good stuff is £39bn for social housing. Except that, not only is it over 10 years but it's also backloaded.
Which means that, for the next few years at least, it's actually a cut.
The biggest announcement in the entire programme is a brazen misdirection and most of the media (present company excepted) is basically giving it a pass.
Great article and analysis. I see nothing mentioned in her review for social care, public ownership.
My question is who will be building “affordable” homes and how is the government defining affordable?
Are they sticking with the Tory nonsense of affordable or have they redefined?
But delivery is about tangible results, something that people can see feel, own. If people’s experiences are just that then great. But I can’t help but get a little pessimistic
I object to the presentation of policies as "achievements" when none of them has happened; the opposition seem too wet to call that out. They are wishes, nothing more.
Allocating nothing to Social Care is to deprive the NHS!!
Where is the NHS money going? Relieving the excessive burden on Frontline staff? or wasting money on the likes of Palantir?
Bravo an excellent analysis AAV.
"A whopping £30 billion for nuclear energy, £14.2 billion of which has already been announced for Sizewell C, which is seeking to replicate the astronomically over-budget and absurdly delayed shambles at Hinkley Point C, a project that’s set to be not just the most expensive nuclear power station ever, but also the most expensive infrastructure project on planet Earth!"
To be fair - the Tories estimated this at over £20 Billion so this makes Reeves' budget look like a bargain in comparison. /S
How on Earth all those nuclear reactors get built in Germany and France, I have no idea... must have cost them a fortune. Oh, wait...
I made more or less the same notes that you did. Except that she gave no details at all about her decisions, or how she arrived at her priorities. And then said nothing about where the colossal sums of money would come from - when we were all led to believe there was an insuperable "black hole" and that if she didn't mess about with winter fuel - there was likely to be a run on the pound! I had a re-read of a long out of print, now very dated, econonics book I co-wrote in the early 70s "Making Sense of Economics" (Fontana 1974) - which has loads of basic stuff she seems to forget continually. And I really think saying she has stabilised the economy, without saying what she means - and not knowing what will happen in the next year or so - is ludicrous. I won't go on!
Tom, you should read what Richard Murphy has to say about the housing spending proposal. It's much less positive than it sounds: https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/06/11/reeves-plan-for-social-housing-is-pitifully-small/
Top of your list of the good stuff is £39bn for social housing. Except that, not only is it over 10 years but it's also backloaded.
Which means that, for the next few years at least, it's actually a cut.
The biggest announcement in the entire programme is a brazen misdirection and most of the media (present company excepted) is basically giving it a pass.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/affordable-homes-programme-settlement-tawdry-con-how-dreary-venning-hop2e/?trackingId=ocdzUv9hPDbupTiNsj%2BzUg%3D%3D