Conflict in the Middle East: Cost of Living

5. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the conflict in the middle east on the cost of living.

8. What steps she has taken to help mitigate the potential impact of the conflict in the middle east on the economy.

17. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the conflict in the middle east on energy costs.

We are monitoring the situation and preparing for every eventuality. The International Monetary Fund expects the UK to be the fastest growing European G7 economy cumulatively over this year and next. A rapid de-escalation of the conflict remains the best way to protect consumers from rising bills. We continue to act on the cost of living, with £117 on average off energy bills from 1 April, £53 million to help with the cost of heating oil, and freezing both rail fares and prescription charges.

I thank the Chancellor for her answer. The tensions in the middle east are pushing up energy and food prices, adding further pressure to households who are already struggling due to the cost of living. The Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister warned this weekend that families face “eight-plus months” of difficulty ahead. With the school holidays approaching in both the May half-term and the summer, many low-income families in my constituency of Guildford are asking how they will get through the summer. When I visited Holy Trinity school in my constituency last week, the children raised concerns too, which shows how deep the anxiety about this conflict is. What concrete support will the Government provide to protect the most vulnerable households from further cost pressures in the months ahead, especially if this conflict continues into the summer holidays?

I welcome the hon. Lady’s question. Like her, I regularly see pupils and local teachers in my constituency. As she knows, from this month we have got rid of the two-child limit in universal credit, which is lifting 450,000 children out of poverty. We are also expanding free childcare for children aged between nine months and five years, helping parents in work with the costs of balancing family life with work life. In addition, we have taken £117 off energy bills, we are freezing rail fares and prescription charges, and we are helping people—particularly those in rural areas—with the cost of heating oil.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor for her efforts in what are far from ideal circumstances. Attacks on energy infrastructure and the effective closure of the strait of Hormuz are having real consequences here at home. Baker Hughes employs more than 300 people in Nailsea in my constituency of North Somerset and is an essential energy technology provider. It is at the sharp end of this crisis. Can the Chancellor confirm what support the Government are providing to exposed companies like Baker Hughes, to secure energy supplies and rebuild damaged supply chains today, and invest in the infrastructure we will need to protect British consumers tomorrow?

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Baker Hughes, an important employer in his constituency, is a good example of how this conflict is affecting businesses and families here at home. As he knows, we have stepped in to defend our Gulf allies who have been attacked, unprovoked, by Iran. We are working with our allies in the Gulf, whom I speak to on a very regular basis, to ensure that we are not only defending them now but helping them to rebuild their infrastructure. Here in Britain, both the supercharger and the British industrial competitiveness scheme are helping businesses with the cost of their energy.

In my constituency, the owner of a haulage business—a vital industry that keeps our economy moving—has reported a 40% increase in the cost of diesel. It is at risk of going bust, while companies like BP are reporting record profits. Given that the impact of the conflict will be felt up to eight months after its conclusion, will the Chancellor please commit to cutting fuel duty, to keep my businesses and my residents on the road?

Fuel duty was never lower at any point under the previous Conservative Government or, indeed, the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government. We are keeping under review what happens from September, but it is important to note that in the first three months of this year, revenues from fuel duty were no higher than they were just a year ago.

With regard to the profits of energy companies, that is exactly why we extended the energy profits levy: to ensure that windfall profits could be taxed appropriately. BP and other oil and gas companies play a really important part in our energy mix, and our important British companies are representing our country in the US this week, but it is important that windfall profits are properly taxed, whether that is through the electricity generator levy or the energy profits levy.

I am grateful to the Chancellor for the work she is doing to protect us from the economic impacts of this war. One of my local farmers has been in touch about the impact on red diesel prices, which are up by around 70%, and fertiliser prices, and shared his nervousness about the affordability of going ahead and planting next year’s crops. Can the Chancellor outline what more she can do to protect our farmers, our food security and our food prices in light of these global challenges?

When we froze fuel duty and extended that freeze, that also impacted red diesel. As we keep under review what happens to fuel duty, we will do the same for red diesel. I think there are two crucial issues. The first is protecting supply, which is why de-escalating this conflict—not ramping it up, as the Tories and Reform would do—is so important, so that we can reopen the strait of Hormuz. The second is prices and costs. That is why we have introduced the British industrial competitiveness scheme to help businesses with energy costs and the supercharger. BICS comes in from this year, and the supercharger is extended from this year, to help businesses impacted by this conflict.

Given that national debt is around 95% of GDP and debt interest costs are nearly 4% of GDP, does the Chancellor agree that it would be irresponsible to fund any cost of living support by increasing borrowing? That would further drive up borrowing costs, choke off growth and saddle future generations with totally unfair debt.

I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on running his fourth London marathon this week for a cancer charity. I know that cause is dear to his heart. He makes an important point. I understand why people are calling for immediate support, but the previous Government’s untargeted support—I understand why the former Chancellor did what he did—cost more than £100 billion in total, I think, and it meant that interest rates, inflation and taxes have ended up being higher than they needed to be. We managed to reduce Government borrowing by £20 billion last year. The budget deficit is below 5% for the first time since 2019. Sticking to fiscal responsibility is not just good for the public purse; it is also good for ordinary families and businesses. I am determined that we do not go back to the high inflation, high interest rates and high taxes that would be the inevitable result if we had an untargeted response to this conflict.

Cost of living, cost of living, cost of living—those are the three words that my constituents in South Ribble and the small area of Chorley that I represent contact me about every single week. They do not contact me about the Westminster bubble and process. Will the Chancellor please assure me that she will stay laser-focused on delivering on the cost of living for the constituents of South Ribble and will not allow the noise and disruption from the Opposition to put her off?

I thank my hon. Friend for standing up for the people of South Ribble and the issues that matter to them. Since the general election, there have been six cuts in interest rates, which is the best way to help people with the cost of living, especially if they have a mortgage. Before this conflict began, unemployment was falling, the economy was growing, the deficit was coming down and interest rates had gone down six times. I will continue to focus on the cost of living, because that is the thing that matters most to all our constituents.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Australia, Italy, India and more have all slashed fuel duty in response to Trump’s idiotic war in Iran. We Liberal Democrats are calling for fuel duty to be cut by 12p per litre here. Last week, the Chancellor claimed that anyone calling for a cut in fuel duty was “economically illiterate”, because it would push up inflation. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, the current 5p fuel duty cut has led to a 0.2% reduction in the rate of inflation. Does the Chancellor think that the OBR and all these other countries that are helping their citizens are economically illiterate, or does she accept that her Government might be in the wrong and that it is time to act?

Last time she stood up in the Chamber, the hon. Lady said that she wanted a 10p cut in fuel duty; now it is a 12p cut. What she has failed to explain is how on earth she is going to pay for any of those policies. As a former Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt), has just explained, untargeted support will result in higher inflation, higher interest rates and higher taxes, which would hurt people in St Albans and around the country rather than helping them with the cost of living.

I support what the Liberal Democrats say about opposing the war in Iran—that is our policy—but they appear to be the only people on the planet who think that a war in the middle east is somehow good for the Treasury coffers. I would not be surprised if in their next manifesto they said they would commit themselves to closing the strait of Hormuz for good. It is not good economic policy, and I am afraid that that says a lot about the Liberal Democrats’ policies.