Michael Simmons

The rate of inflation remained flat at 3.4 per cent in May – still well above the Bank of England's 2 per cent target. Bizarrely, the Office for National Statistics (ONS), in their figures released this morning, claims this is down from 3.5 per cent the month before, even though just a couple of weeks ago they admitted that figure was overstated due to an error. Because of a policy not to revise inflation figures, that error lives on – leading them to announce the fiction that inflation has fallen. The reality is it has not. The result of stubbornly sticking to this no-revisions policy is a slew of misreporting about Britain's economy. The Today programme told us inflation was ‘cooling’, and news websites are already parroting the ONS line that inflation has fallen.

Rachel Reeves may finally have seen sense. A report in this morning’s Financial Times suggests she is ‘exploring’ performing a 180 on the changes to inheritance tax rules which meant non doms would have to pay the death tax on their global assets – even on wealth earned before they came to the UK. As I explained in our magazine cover piece last month, the fact that these changes – which came into force in April – would apply retroactively is what really sent non-doms over the edge and led them to flee the country in large numbers, taking their wealth and not insignificant tax revenues with them.

Rachel Reeves’s spending review was the ‘most incomprehensible speech I’ve ever heard from a chancellor’, according to Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. He spoke to me on today’s edition of Coffee House Shots. In this special episode, I was also joined by Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, to take a wider look at Britain's fiscal and economic problems. Why, despite record tax levels, do our public services feel as if they’re in managed decline? Why do voters’ expectations of the state seem so out of whack with what we actually deliver? We discussed whether Ruth’s predecessor, Torston Bell, was right to claim Labour has ended austerity, and how much the lingering effects of Covid still shape where we are today.

Writing about Britain’s spending plans has started to feel a bit like swimming through treacle. It’s not that there aren’t lots of interesting observations to make about Wednesday’s £300 billion spending announcement. Such as the fact that the NHS sucks up the bulk of the resource spending with a 3 per cent rise in real terms, while every other department combined only grows by 0.2 per cent. Or that the health service will soon take up nearly half of all day-to-day government spending on services. Or that only 13 per cent of Rachel Reeves’s capital spending increase is classed as ‘growth-focused’.It’s hard to pay attention to this because of the sense that the looming fiscal crisis is being largely ignored.

When Rachel Reeves last week tried to shift the narrative around her spending review – from one of fiscal restraint to ‘spend, spend, spend’ – she ‘unveiled’ £113 billion in infrastructure investment. But for those in Westminster with more than a short-term memory, they will have felt a distinct sense of déjà vu. That’s because much of what Reeves announced had already appeared on gov.uk more than 18 months ago. These were Conservative plans, shelved for the election, now revived under a different party banner. Last week, Rachel Reeves announced £1.5 billion in funding to improve trams and buses in south Yorkshire. Eighteen months ago, the plans for south Yorkshire stood at £1.5 billion. In Liverpool, it’s the same story: £1.6 billion then, and £1.