Keir Starmer today staunchly defended the recent Budget, asserting it was not “misleading” as he sought to bolster support for his Chancellor during a press conference.

The Prime Minister emphasized that the government faced limited alternatives, namely austerity or increased borrowing, to the substantial tax increases. He was standing by Rachel Reeves’ fiscal strategy.

This statement comes in the wake of revelations from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which had informed ministers months prior that it did not perceive a deficit in the public finances. A significant portion of the additional £30 billion raised is earmarked for higher benefit expenses.

Sir Keir urged frustrated Labour MPs to remain committed to his “long-term plan” following a weekend fraught with criticism directed at Ms. Reeves. She had been vocal about a fiscal crisis, possibly to prepare the public for the impending tax measures.

In a show of solidarity with his Chancellor, Starmer suggested that the government had navigated through the most challenging phase. He stated, “Our choices were fair, necessary, and fundamentally beneficial for growth,” underscoring the necessity of raising government revenue.

‘Our choices were fair, they were necessary and they were fundamentally good for growth,’ the premier said, arguing that the government was ‘always going to have to raise revenue’.

In an effort to blunt criticism that the monster tax rises are being blown on benefits, Sir Keir vowed a new crackdown on welfare. However, he refused to commit to spending being curbed before the next election in 2029. 

Even ministers are said to be furious at being kept in the dark over the OBR forecasts, with Ms Reeves confirming this morning the Cabinet was not told. The Chancellor is facing a twin threat of probes from No10’s standards watchdog and the financial regulator. 

Keir Starmer insisted tax rises were the only option at the Budget today as he launched a desperate bid to shore up his Chancellor

Even ministers are said to be furious at being kept in the dark over the OBR forecasts, with Ms Reeves confirming this morning the Cabinet was not told about the details 

Sir Keir again kept referring to the OBR’s £16billion productivity downgrade this morning – but as this chart shows the full economic forecast actually left Ms Reeves with £16billion more to play with than in March  

Sir Keir repeatedly referred to the £16billion cost of a productivity downgrade, without mentioning that was completely offset by higher tax revenue and inflation estimates. 

‘There was no misleading, and I simply don’t accept, and I was receiving the numbers, that being told that the OBR productivity review means you’ve got £16billion less than you would otherwise have had shows that you’ve got an easy starting point.

‘Yes, of course, all the other figures have to be taken into account. But we started the process with significantly less than we would otherwise have had.’

He said there was ‘no pretending’ that it was a ‘good starting point’.

He added: ‘There was a point at which we did think we would have to breach the manifesto in order to achieve what we wanted to achieve. Later on, it became possible to do it without the manifesto breach.

‘Given the choice between the two, I didn’t want to breach the manifesto, and that’s why we came to the decisions that we did.’

The premier swiped at the OBR saying he was ‘not sure’ why the productivity review had not been conducted at the end of the Tory government’s time in power.

Sir Keir said: ‘Doing it at the end of the last government might have been a good time to do a productivity review… it had to be done sometime but picking up the tab for the last government’s failure… 

‘I am not angry, I am just bemused.’ 

Sir Keir said: ‘We have to be clear at this stage of our plan, the most important thing that we can do for growth, the most important thing that we can do for business, is first to drive inflation down so that interest rates come down further still, and the cost of business investment comes down with it and, second, to retain market confidence that allows for real economic stability so that businesses can plan with certainty.

‘That is what the country needs most right now.

‘It is what the Budget secured and that is why our choices were fair, they were necessary and they were fundamentally good for growth.

‘But I will level with you as the Budget showed the path to a Britain that is truly built for all requires many more decisions that are not cost-free and they’re not easy.’

In what amounted to a plea to Labour MPs, Sir Keir said: ‘We have now walked through the narrowest part of the tunnel,’ he said during a speech in London.

He acknowledged that the cost-of-living crisis has not gone away and said: ‘In the year ahead you will see the benefits of our approach, and not just in the national statistics, but in your communities.’

He added: ‘Bit by bit, you will see a country that no longer feels the burden of decline, or the sense that things can never get better.’

Meanwhile, speaking at the Wales Investment Summit, Ms Reeves confirmed that Cabinet was not told of the far more positive forecasts.

She told the BBC: ‘You would never expect the Prime Minister and Chancellor to go through all the detailed numbers.

‘The cabinet are briefed on the morning of the Budget on the Budget numbers.

‘Of course, we go through things that affect individual government departments, but the whole information of the Budget is not supposed to be provided until the Chancellor delivers the Budget.

‘Obviously, this time, it was leaked early, but not by the Treasury.’

Sir Keir has also delivered another sop to mutinous Labour MPs by hinting at a major new move to unwind Brexit. 

‘It is clear from all of the analysis that the deal that we’ve got has hurt our economy,’ he said. 

‘That’s why we’ve rebuilt relations and reset relations with the EU and I’m proud that we’ve done that. That is why we’re moving forward.’ 

Sir Keir’s and Ms Reeves’ fates are seen as fundamentally intertwined, with mounting questions over whether they can cling on. 

Last night Ms Reeves told Channel 4 News there was no need for an investigation into whether she misled the markets and taxpayers.

Touring broadcast studios amid rising fury at the way she softened up the public for monster tax hikes yesterday, the Chancellor said the PM had been fully aware of what she was doing. 

She insisted OBR’s downgrades were to blame for her decisions – even though the watchdog had in fact been informing her privately that there was no structural black hole in the finances. 

And she denied that her extraordinary fear-mongering about the state of the government’s books amounted to lying.

Ms Reeves spent weeks before the fiscal package was unveiled talking up how the independent body had found a huge black hole in the books.

However, OBR has revealed it told her as long ago as September that productivity downgrades were being offset by better tax revenues. 

In fact by the end of October, Budget forecasts were showing her running a small surplus, with only Labour’s own political choices to boost benefits meaning that she needed to impose a massive package of tax hikes.

Ms Reeves told Sky News that the ‘big downgrade in productivity’ was the main factor in her decisions, saying it had a ‘big impact’ and ‘that’s why I had to ask people to contribute more’.

Ms Reeves admitted she did know that she was running a surplus when she gave an extraordinary breakfast-time speech talking up the grim state of the public finances.

But she denied ‘lying’ to the public about the situation, arguing that she needed a bigger buffer to avoid markets panicking about government debt. 

Ms Reeves sparked shock from presenter Trevor Phillips by initially dodging a question on whether she had ‘lied’ to the public.

But pressed again she said: ‘Of course I didn’t.’

The Times reported that even some of her ministerial colleagues feel misled. A senior figure told the paper: ‘At no point were the Cabinet told about the reality of the OBR forecasts.’ 

Writing to the PM’s ministerial standards adviser, Sir Laurie Magnus, Nigel Farage said voters faced ‘the heaviest tax burden in generations on the basis of what increasingly looks like a sustained misrepresentation of the true fiscal position’. 

He said Ms Reeves carried out a ‘sustained public and media campaign portraying the public finances as being in a state of collapse’ to lay the ground for a £30billion tax raid.

Mr Farage told Sir Laurie: ‘Treasury officials repeatedly briefed journalists about an alleged ”black hole” of £22billion and even £40billion, figures incompatible with OBR forecasts the Chancellor had seen. There is no indication she corrected those briefings or disassociated herself from them.’

A letter from the OBR to the Treasury Select Committee has been published spelling out the timetable of exactly what forecasts were provided to the Chancellor as she drew up her Budget package

The Chancellor offered only lukewarm support for Richard Hughes amid Treasury anger at the Budget leak and revelations about when she was told there was no hole in the public finances

The Chancellor appears to have broken the Ministerial Code, which requires her to ‘give accurate and truthful information to Parliament’ and ‘be as open as possible with Parliament and the public’, Mr Farage said.

She could also face a probe by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) after the Tories accused her of ‘possible market abuse’, causing volatility in the City with ‘briefings, leaks and spin from HM Treasury’. The Tories demanded Ms Reeves come to the Commons today to ‘explain the extent to which she misled the public’.

Alex Burghart, shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, told Sir Keir: ‘These briefings have affected not only the integrity of the fiscal process, but the rights of Members of Parliament and more importantly the lives of working people.’

Repeating her call for Ms Reeves to resign, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch told the BBC: ‘The Chancellor called an emergency Press conference… about how terrible the state of the finances were and now we have seen that the OBR had told her the complete opposite.’