Former Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has criticized the independent fiscal watchdog for its lack of “political neutrality” in light of its forthcoming evaluation, which may yield unfavorable findings for the Conservative administration.
The previous administration has faced allegations from Rachel Reeves, the current Chancellor, claiming it left behind a £22 billion financial “black hole” in the balance between income and promised expenditures in public finances.
Ms. Reeves asserted that she only discovered this upon assuming her governmental role, as the Tory government concealed pertinent information from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which acts as independent budget forecasters.
The OBR’s inquiry into the matters of potential information concealment and the previous government’s transparency in departmental spending is set to be released on Wednesday, coinciding with the budget.
Mr. Hunt remarked, “I do not believe that releasing a review containing criticisms of the principal opposition party on the same day as a budget is compatible with political neutrality.”
Money blog: ‘Someone was killed in my house – do I need to tell buyers?’
Please use the Chrome browser for an improved video player experience.
Budget: Who are ‘strivers’?
No Conservative ministers were consulted for their input, Mr. Hunt added, suggesting that this absence rendered the review a “political maneuver.”
The announcement’s timing on budget day “suggested that the OBR had already formed a judgment,” stated Mr. Hunt.
The anticipated tax increases and reductions in public expenditure outlined in Wednesday’s budget statement are premised on the existence of a £22 billion financial gap.
Stay updated with all the latest news from the UK and across the globe by following Sky News
OBR Chairman Richard Hughes noted that the report would “exclusively focus on the institutional relationship between the OBR and the Treasury” while evaluating the “sufficiency of the information and assurances” provided by the Treasury.
He further mentioned that the watchdog deemed it “neither necessary nor appropriate, considering the potential market implications of certain information contained within, to grant ministers of the previous government access to the report’s contents and conclusions prior to its release.”
