How George Osborne’s spending cuts will affect each government department
And I bet there will have been little or no rural proofing……
The government is seeking another £16bn in spending cuts of current or “resource” spending by 2020, according to an IFS analysis of its plans.
Separately from that, the Treasury is seeking £12bn in cuts to welfare spending, from tax credits managed by HMRC and other benefits administered by the Department for Work and Pensions. Capital spending on big-ticket investments such as road and rail improvements is protected.
A number of departments, including health, international development and defence, as well as part of the schools budget are also ringfenced. This means other departments are facing cuts of up to 40%, which are likely to lead to large reductions in Whitehall staff numbers. [this is interesting as Tony Travers pointed out at the RSN conference nearly all the significant staffing reductions in the public sector so far have been focused at the local level and the numbers employed in Whitehall have currently hardly reduced at all]
Cuts agreed
Treasury
Osborne’s own department oversees HMRC, which is responsible for tax credit spending. The department has already agreed to resource spending cuts of 30% but is still working out how to reduce the impact of a plan for £4bn of cuts to tax credits that was rejected by the House of Lords.
Communities and Local Government
DCLG has agreed to cuts of about 30% over the next four years. This is separate to funding for local government, and is likely to involve the closure of what the Treasury refers to as “low-value programmes”.
Transport
Cuts of 30% have been agreed to the DfT’s current budget over the next four years. It could affect sustainable transport and funding for buses, walking and cycling programmes. Capital spending is protected so big investments in road and rail will go ahead as planned.
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Cuts of 30% have been agreed, with the department expected to scale back the extent of its footprint while trying to prioritise spending on flood and disease prevention.