Was this a budget that respected working people?

Patrick Maguire, one of the political correspondents with the closest connections to the new Labour government, summarised this afternoon’s Budget with admirable clarity today.

The “political definition of this government [is] coming into sharper relief”, he said on X. “Workerist.”
 
This was a Budget that continuously sought to create a crucial dividing line in Britain: placing working people and those at the frontline of the cost of living crisis, on one side, and those who have enjoyed greater prosperity in recent years, including many businesses, on the other. 
 
Again and again, the Chancellor stressed this theme. It underpinned the few moments of pantomime – with private jets taxed more and pints in pubs taxed less. It shaped the nature of the announcements on public services, including those prioritising state education over private, and breakfast clubs and SEND provision at the front of the queue. And it underpinned the big tax choices as well, with workers protected from rises in income tax, VAT and National Insurance, while employers pay more and increases in Capital Gains Tax carrying much of the rest of the burden.
 
Not everyone will welcome these choices, of course. But, as our public opinion research with More in Common has revealed, this is the argument that the Chancellor wants to have. Putting respect for working people front and centre of our politics is exactly what the a large part of public has been calling for, including during the election. The country has grown tired of a political process that seems to ignore the challenges of ordinary life.  
 
And yet not everything will be plain sailing for this most political of Chancellors.

For one, the growth figures outlined in the Budget are significantly lower than she would have been hoping for, leading to tougher choices in the years ahead and meaning that it will be extremely difficult for the government to meet the mission it set out at the election to top the G-7 growth league.  
 
Also, despite all of the tax rises, the settlement for public services remains extremely tight, far tighter than many commentators suggested they would be. There will be frontline workers who remain deeply concerned about their ability to provide the services that the public have the right to demand and there will be communities looking at their fraying public infrastructure and still worrying if anyone really cares. 
 
These are the challenges for the days ahead. Rachel Reeves has explained to the country precisely how she wants to be evaluated. How it all plays out for working people across the country, will determine their judgement.