The Government Record

Successive governments should be judged on the decisions they took, the resources they used and the results they achieved. This page opens the existing comparison to examination.

Did governments have an objective to reduce debt?

Successive governments set fiscal objectives. The appraisal must establish what they promised, how they intended to deliver it and what happened. Reducing annual borrowing, reducing debt relative to the economy and reducing the cash debt are three different commitments.

The stated objectives

This chronology summarises selected rules, rather than every change. Dates describe fiscal frameworks, which do not always coincide with changes of Prime Minister.

Government / framework	Selected objective
Labour, original framework	Keep debt within 40% of GDP over the economic cycle; cover day-to-day spending with revenues over that cycle.
Labour, 2009–2010	Halve the deficit by 2013/14; debt/GDP falling in 2015/16.
Coalition, 2010–2015	Debt/GDP falling in 2015/16; subsequently 2016/17.
Conservative, 2015–2016	Budget surplus in 2019/20 and thereafter; debt/GDP falling annually.
Conservative, 2016–2019	Debt/GDP falling in 2020/21.
Conservative, 2019–2020	Current-budget balance, investment and debt-interest limits.
Conservative, 2021–2022	Debt/GDP excluding the Bank of England falling in forecast year three.
Conservative, 2022–2024	That debt ratio falling in forecast year five.
Labour, framework introduced 2024	Net financial liabilities/GDP falling by 2029/30; current-budget balance also targeted.

Source: House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee: fiscal rules since 1997. Checked 10 September 2026.

How we will judge delivery

Test	Evidence required
Objective	The original commitment, exact debt or borrowing measure and whether it concerns pounds or a share of GDP.
Deadline	The original target year, subsequent extensions and whether the horizon kept moving.
Delivery plan	Specified expenditure reforms and revenue measures, their costs, risks and responsible ministers.
Result	Actual results for the target year on the same statistical basis; distinguish forecast compliance from achieved outcomes.
Changes and explanation	Changes to rules, measures or deadlines; the stated reasons and evidence concerning external shocks and policy decisions.

The financial snapshots on this page measure net debt excluding public sector banks. Some targets use a different measure, including debt excluding the Bank of England or net financial liabilities, which account for a wider set of financial assets and liabilities. Their performance cannot be scored directly from the snapshot table.

What the evidence establishes so far

The OBR reported in March 2023 that the deadline for falling debt had been moved back repeatedly. It also recorded actual falls in underlying debt as a share of GDP in some years. The record therefore requires examination of both target changes and results, rather than a blanket verdict that no government sought to control debt. Source: OBR, March 2023 Economic and fiscal outlook, discussion of fiscal targets.

Appraisal status: the objectives have been identified at framework level. Original delivery plans, target-year results and reasons for each revision remain to be assessed before assigning government-by-government verdicts. Targets whose deadlines remain in the future are pending, rather than failures.

Our assessment will distinguish an absent or inadequate objective, an unsupported delivery plan, a missed commitment and an evidenced revision. A cash-debt increase alone cannot establish failure against a debt/GDP target.

We have yet to establish whether successive governments achieved sustained reductions in committed expenditure that reduced the national debt. The appraisal will also identify savings that slowed debt growth and explain their use.

The annual financial record

How much came in, how much was spent, and how large was the gap? These comparable financial years cover April to March. Figures are £ billions at the prices of each year, covering the public sector excluding public sector banks.

Income includes taxes and other current receipts. Spending is total managed expenditure. The funding gap is calculated as spending less income. Totals are calculated from twelve monthly observations before rounding; the latest estimates remain subject to revision.

Sources: ONS public income, JW2O and ONS public expenditure, KX5Q, released 21 August 2026; checked 10 September 2026. These are nominal amounts: comparing service provision over time also requires inflation, population and outcome measures. Transition years span administrations and should be assessed accordingly.

The starting point for the rolling 15-year plan

In 2025/26, spending of £1,360bn exceeded income of £1,230bn by £130bn. This is the latest complete financial year in this edition. It provides the initial annual totals against which the detailed plan can be reconciled.

For every £100 spent, approximately £90 was covered by income and £10 by the funding gap. This describes the overall accounts, rather than attributing borrowing to particular services. Amounts are rounded independently to whole numbers, so displayed totals may differ by £1bn.

The historical baseline must then be carried forward to the plan’s chosen start year, allowing for existing commitments, population, prices, interest rates and announced policy. A saving can reduce borrowing or support a new priority; the same pound cannot do both.

What the completed financial baseline must contain

• Expenditure by function: reconcile pensions, other welfare, health, education, defence and the remaining functions to the spending total, with every item counted once.
• Commitments and timing: show £ amounts and spending shares that can realistically change within one year, five years and fifteen years, with the legal, contractual and service consequences.
• Income and financing: identify the taxes and other receipts funding expenditure, the annual borrowing requirement and exposure to debt-interest changes.
• Service and asset condition: record outcomes, maintenance backlogs and capabilities, so reducing expenditure can be judged alongside what the nation receives.

Turning savings into funded projects

Each proposed reform should show gross savings, implementation costs, continuing operating costs, the date savings become available and a realistic uncertainty range. Separate cash released from staff time or capacity improved. Count benefits shared between Departments once.

The PDMA can then rank projects against the Mission’s objectives and schedule their funding through the Minister for Transformation. The plan should publish annual targets for expenditure, income, borrowing, project costs and outcomes, with independent scrutiny and an annual revision extending the horizon by another year.

Explore the six mechanisms for funding transformation. The Prime Directive is to achieve transformation without adding to national debt; the assessment distinguishes Committed and Flexible Expenditure over explicit time horizons.

Completion status: the six-year income and spending record above is sourced and calculated. The full spending breakdown, commitment assessment and costed transformation scenarios are still to be completed. Funding must be established from evaluated reforms and other mechanisms, with every benefit counted once.

Debt added during each government’s period

Each row attributes the change to the government serving during the stated interval. These month-end reference points approximate handovers; they are not exact inauguration accounts.

All displayed figures are rounded to whole numbers. Debt added is calculated from unrounded balances; the annual average divides that increase by elapsed months divided by twelve. Independent rounding explains why the first increase is £681bn although subtracting the displayed balances gives £680bn.

Cash debt increased in all four intervals. The debt-to-GDP ratio rose in the first three and edged down in the last. The 2015–2024 interval includes COVID: its exceptional costs and the decisions taken require separate examination.

Cash amounts are nominal, rather than adjusted for inflation. Debt changes also include financial transactions and valuation effects, so they differ from accumulated annual borrowing. These figures establish the financial change during each interval; they do not alone establish causation or the quality of spending.

Sources: ONS net debt, HF6W and ONS debt / GDP, HF6X. Public sector excluding public sector banks; release 21 August 2026, checked 10 September 2026. Estimates remain subject to revision.

Inspect the original working figures and correction notes

Source figures awaiting verification. The table below transcribes selected entries from the Government Performance Register. These are working figures, not independently verified official statistics. The source does not identify whether the spending figures are averages or snapshots within each period.

Spending, defence and debt

Spending columns are £ billions in nominal prices; the debt column is £ trillions. Nominal changes include inflation. Periods are reproduced as labelled in the source and are not equal in length.

Source period	Total expenditure £bn	Defence £bn	Debt interest £bn	Debt £trn
Blair 1997–2001	360	23	25	0.37
Blair 2001–2005	420	28	22	0.42
Blair 2005–2007	530	32	28	0.48
Brown 2007–2010	620	35	35	0.78
Cameron coalition 2010–2015	695	36	47	1.30
Cameron majority 2015–2016	730	34	50	1.60
May 2016–2019	770	36	52	1.76
Johnson pre-COVID 2019–20	820	38	52	1.82
COVID 2020–21	1100	38	45	2.16
Johnson post-COVID 2021–22	1020	44	52	2.30
Truss 2022	1060	48	80	2.37
Sunak 2022–2024	1080	52	100	2.50
Starmer 2024–26	1200	60	110	2.81

What needs correcting

• Debt ratio: the final column gives debt of £2.81trn and GDP of £2.65trn, which implies approximately 106%, while its debt ratio is 97%. Those entries cannot describe the same basis and date.
• Borrowing: the final column gives revenue of £1,050bn and spending of £1,200bn, a £150bn difference, alongside a £130bn deficit. Definitions and adjustments need reconciling.
• Spending categories: pensions and social protection may overlap. Listed categories must not be added until their boundaries are established.
• Government periods: annual outcomes cannot be assigned entirely to a brief administration. The 2022 figures need explicit dates and an explanation of shared responsibility.
• Defence: nominal spending, inflation-adjusted spending, spending shares and military capability answer different questions. A rising cash figure can coexist with declining capability.

From figures to accountability

For each government, the next evidence layer will place a verified inherited position beside a verified end position. It will link major promises and decisions to costs and outcomes, distinguishing external shocks and inherited commitments from choices made in office.

The original record’s labels such as “sound”, “disastrous” and “adequate” are judgements requiring published criteria. They are not used here as established findings.

Source

RGB_GovernmentPerformanceRegister.pdf, supplied UK-Governance working material. Source providers named in that document: HM Treasury PESA, OBR, ukpublicspending.co.uk, Statista and IFS. Individual data references remain to be established.

Return to Government Accountability