The chancellor says she “rejects” new analysis that suggests the average family could be £1,400 a year worse off by the end of the decade.
Rachel Reeves told Sky’s Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips programme that living standards will “increase during the course of this parliament”.
She insisted there has already been a “sustained increase” since Labour came to power last year.
The analysis, by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), says frozen tax thresholds, rising mortgage and rent costs, and falling real earnings are all predicted to take their toll on living standards in Britain.
For the poorest third, living standards are forecast to drop twice as much compared with middle and high earners.
The charity believes the government will miss one of its stated “milestones” – to raise living standards across the UK before the next election.
It says the £1,400 drop by April 2030 means a 3% fall in disposable income for the average family, while the lowest income households will be £900 per year worse off – a 6% fall.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:32
Rachel Reeves admits tax rises ‘impact’ the economy
The situation could be even bleaker for some, as the analysis doesn’t account for the recently announced £5bn in cuts to disability benefits.
Average earnings are also set to fall by £700 per year by 2030, according to the JRF.
The charity – which conducts research into reducing poverty – says it came up with its prediction by modelling forecasts from the Bank of England and others.
Chancellor ‘confident we will see living standards increase’
Asked by Trevor Phillips for her response to the findings, the chancellor said she “rejects” them.
Ms Reeves argued living standards in the last parliament “were the worst ever on record”, and said the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said in October they are expected to increase, while wages are currently rising at twice the rate of inflation.
“I’m confident that we will see living standards increase during the course of this parliament,” the chancellor insisted, adding there has been a “sustained increase” since Labour was elected.
“We’ve got to do more, absolutely, in terms of raising living standards. But this government has already got started in delivering our plan for change.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:29
What to expect from the spring statement
But the JRF says the government welfare cuts are “wrong” and counterproductive and wants the plan scrapped.
It also urges a new “minimum floor” for Universal Credit to help address hardship, and believes the government should instead raise cash by increasing tax on wealth and investments.
The analysis comes three days before the chancellor’s spring statement in which more cuts are set to be announced in a bid to improve the country’s finances.
Her speech will be in response to the OBR, which on the same day will publish its own forecasts on the economy, the cost of living and government finances.
Growth is Labour’s top priority, but the Bank of England recently halved its growth outlook for the UK economy this year to 0.75%.
There are also worries next month’s hike to employer national insurance and the minimum wage will create further drag on investment.
A US judge has granted prediction markets platform Kalshi a temporary reprieve from enforcement after the state of Connecticut sent it a cease and desist order last week for allegedly conducting unlicensed gambling.
The Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) sent Kalshi, along with Robinhood and Crypto.com, cease and desist orders on Dec. 2, accusing them of “conducting unlicensed online gambling, more specifically sports wagering, in Connecticut through its online sports event contracts.”
Kalshi sued the DCP a day later, arguing its event contracts “are lawful under federal law” and its platform was subject to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s “exclusive jurisdiction,” and filed a motion on Friday to temporarily stop the DCP’s action.
An excerpt from Kalshi’s preliminary injunction motion arguing that the DCP’s action violates federal commodities laws. Source: CourtListener
Connecticut federal court judge Vernon Oliver said in an order on Monday that the DCP must “refrain from taking enforcement action against Kalshi” as the court considers the company’s bid to temporarily stop the regulator.
The order adds that the DCP should file a response to the company by Jan. 9 and Kalshi should file further support for its motion by Jan. 30, with oral arguments for the case to be held in mid-February.
Kalshi does battle with multiple US states
Kalshi is a federally regulated designated contract maker under the CFTC and, in January, began offering contracts nationally that allow bets on the outcome of events such as sports and politics.
Its platform has become hugely popular this year and saw a record $4.54 billion monthly trading volume in November, attracting billions in investments, with Kalshi closing a $1 billion funding round earlier this month at a valuation of $11 billion.
However, multiple US state regulators have taken issue with Kalshi’s offerings, which have led to the company being embroiled in lawsuits over whether it is subject to state-level gambling laws.
Kalshi sued the New York State Gaming Commission in October after the regulator sent a cease and desist order claiming it offered a platform for sports wagering without a license.
In September, Massachusetts’ state attorney general sued Kalshi in state court, which the company asked to be tossed. So far this year, Kalshi has sued state regulators in New Jersey, Nevada, Maryland and Ohio, accusing each of regulatory overreach.
Sir Keir Starmer has called for a tougher approach to policing Europe’s borders ahead of a meeting between leaders to discuss a potential shake-up of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The prime minister said the way in which the ECHR is interpreted in courts must be modernised, with critics long claiming the charter is a major barrier to deportations of illegal migrants.
His deputy, David Lammy, will today be in Strasbourg, France, with fellow European ministers to discuss reforms of how the agreement is interpreted in law across the continent.
In an opinion piece for The Guardian, Sir Keir and his Danish counterpart, Mette Frederiksen, said the change was necessary to prevent voters from turning to populist political opponents.
Image: Small boat crossings have risen this year. File pic: PA
What’s the issue with the ECHR?
The ECHR, which is the foundation of Britain’s Human Rights Act, includes the right to family life in its Article 8.
That is often used as grounds to prevent deportations of illegal migrants from the UK.
More on Asylum
Related Topics:
There has also been a rise in cases where Article 3 rights, prohibiting torture, were used to halt deportations over claims migrants’ healthcare needs could not be met in their home country, according to the Home Office.
The Conservatives and Reform UK have both said they would leave the ECHR if in power, while the Labour government has insisted it will remain a member of the treaty.
But Sir Keir admitted in his joint op-ed that the “current asylum framework was created for another era”.
“In a world with mass mobility, yesterday’s answers do not work. We will always protect those fleeing war and terror – but the world has changed, and asylum systems must change with it,” the two prime ministers wrote, as they push for a “modernisation of the interpretation” of the ECHR.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:16
System ‘more than broken’, says asylum seeker
What is happening today?
Mr Lammy is attending an informal summit of the Council of Europe.
He is expected to say: “We must strike a careful balance between individual rights and the public’s interest.
“The definition of ‘family life’ can’t be stretched to prevent the removal of people with no right to remain in the country [and] the threshold of ‘inhuman and degrading treatment’ must be constrained to the most serious issues.”
It is understood that a political declaration signed by the gathered ministers could carry enough weight to directly influence how the European Court of Human Rights interprets the treaty.
The UK government is expected to bring forward its own legislation to change how Article 8 is interpreted in UK courts, and is also considering a re-evaluation of the threshold for Article 3 rights.
Image: David Lammy will swap Westminster for Strasbourg today
The plans have been criticised by Amnesty International UK, which described them as weakening protections.
“Human rights were never meant to be optional or reserved for comfortable and secure times. They were designed to be a compass, our conscience, when the politics of fear and division try to steer us wrong,” Steve Valdez-Symonds, the organisation’s refugee and migrant rights programme director, said.
Sir Keir’s government has already adopted several hardline immigration measures – modelled on those introduced by Ms Federiksen’s Danish government – to decrease the number of migrants crossing the Channel via small boats.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:40
Beth Rigby: The two big problems with Labour’s asylum plan
Starmer-Macron deal ‘a sticking plaster’
Meanwhile, French far-right leader Jordan Bardella told The Daily Telegraph he would rewrite his country’s border policy to allow British patrol boats to push back small vessels carrying migrants into France’s waters if he were elected.
The National Rally leader called Sir Keir’s “one-in, one-out” agreement with Emmanuel Macron, which includes Britain returning illegal arrivals in exchange for accepting a matching number of legitimate asylum seekers, a “sticking plaster” and “smokescreen”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:02
Far-right, 30, and France’s most popular politician
He said that only a complete overhaul of French immigration policy would stop the Channel crossings.
Mr Bardella is currently leading in opinion polls to win the first round of France’s next presidential election, expected to happen in 2027, to replace Mr Macron.
The race for the new US Federal Reserve chair is nearing the finish line, with US President Donald Trump reportedly set to begin interviewing finalists for the top job this week.
According to a report from the Financial Times on Tuesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has presented a list of four names to the White House.
One of these is former Fed governor Kevin Warsh, whom Bessent is scheduled to meet with on Wednesday. Another is National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett, who is seen as the frontrunner for the role.
Another two names would be picked from a list of other finalists, which includes Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, and BlackRock chief investment officer Rick Rieder.
Trump and Bessent are expected to hold at least one interview next week, as a decision looks likely to be announced in January.
However, Trump has revealed he already has his eye on one particular candidate.
“We’re going to be looking at a couple different people, but I have a pretty good idea of who I want,” Trump said to journalists on Air Force One on Tuesday.
Kevin Hassett is a frontrunner for Fed chair role
The upcoming round of interviews suggests that Hassett may not be the clear lock in for the role as previously thought, though he is seen as the favorite.
Earlier this month, prediction market odds on Kalshi and Polymarket shot up for Hassett significantly following comments from Trump at the White House on Dec. 2.
While welcoming guests, Trump labeled Hassett as “potential Fed chair” leading many to assume the president had let a major hint slip.
With Hassett’s odds spiking to 85% after Trump’s comments last week, they have since declined to around 73% for Hassett, while Warsh’s odds sit at 13% on Kalshi at the time of writing, which has floated around this range over December.
Regardless of who ends up taking over as chair, the move is bound to impact crypto markets under the new leadership.
If elected, Hassett has asserted that he will be apolitical in terms of running the Fed, despite his close ties to Trump. Speaking with The Wall Street Journal this week, Hassett said that “You just do the right thing” when asked if he would blindly follow orders from Trump.
“Suppose that inflation has gotten from, say, 2.5% to 4%. You can’t cut,” Hassett said, adding that he would rely on his own “judgment, which I think the president trusts.”