Member

That is why I have tabled amendment 1, which would broaden the definition of “fiscally significant measures” to include those that fall below the costing threshold but could have wider fiscal and economic effects. The amendment would ensure that the OBR was able to produce a report when it judged that proposed measures were likely to affect interest rates, the cost of Government borrowing, or economic growth. Whereas a fiscal lock based solely on GDP could leave open the possibility of circumvention, that wider definition would enable the OBR to step in if it thought it likely that Government measures might precipitate the kind of economic disaster we saw after the mini-Budget. It is possible to imagine a situation where a fiscal measure fell just short of the 1% of GDP threshold, but was none the less likely to carry significant ramifications for the cost of Government borrowing, for economic growth and, crucially, for interest rates.