Downing Street has declined to back a bill from Conservative MP that would make first-cousin marriage illegal.

Asked about the government’s stance, a No 10 spokesperson said the expert advice, which is against first-cousin marriages on the grounds of the health risk to any children conceived, was clear. But, asked if the government would support the bill, the spokesperson said “the priorities for the government are very clear”.

The spokesperson was responding to a question about a bill introduced today under the 10-minute rule procedure by Richard Holden, the former Conservative party chair. MPs did not vote against the bill today, but it has no chance of becoming law because no further time is set aside for it.

Holden said he was proposing the bill for reasons of “health, freedom and national values”. He said some people probably assumed first-cousin marriage was already illegal. But, he told MPs, some communities had “extremely high rates of first-cousin marriage, with Irish Travellers being 20% to 40% and higher rates still among the British Pakistani community”.

The independent Iqbal Mohamed spoke against Holden’s plan. He said rather than “stigmatising” cousin marriages, a “much more positive approach” should be adopted to respond to health concerns linked to the children of those relationships.

He said:

The matter needs to be approached as a health awareness issue, a cultural issue where women are being forced against their will to undergo marriage. In doing so it is important to recognise for many people that this is a highly sensitive issue and in discussing it we should try to step into the shoes of those who perhaps are not from the same culture as ours, to better understand why the practice continues to be so widespread.

Mohamed said cousin marriages were “extremely common” in the Middle East and south Asia and he said that, rather than a ban, “a much more positive approach would be to facilitate advanced genetic test screening for prospective married couples, as is the case in all Arab countries in the Persian Gulf”.

Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, has urged peers not to filibuster the bill setting up an independent football regulator.

Yesterday the former Labour cabinet minister Lord Blunkett accused opponents of the football governance bill of acting on behalf of the Premier League and trying to hold up its passage the House of Lords.

Asked about the apparent filibustering operation, Nandy told the Commons culture committtee:

This is a bill that has had cross-party support consensus for a long time, it was a manifesto commitment from this government and it is high time we got on with it.

It is not acceptable to use parliamentary procedures to try to block a piece of legislation on which so many hopes and dreams rest, which was clearly something that we committed to before the election and which my counterpart Stuart Andrew and the Conservative front bench fully support still.

So my message would be that we need to get on with this for the sake of football and out of respect for the fans.

Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, has been criticised by the Nigerian vice-president for “denigrating” his country.

As the Financial Times reports, Kashim Shettima said in a speech that Nigerians were proud of Badenoch’s achievements – even though she regularly talks down the country where she was brought up.

In a speech yesterday celebrating Nigeria’s contribution to the global economy, he said:

Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the British Conservative party. We are proud of her in spite of her efforts at denigrating her nation of origin.

She is entitled to her own opinions; she has even every right to remove the Kemi from her name but that does not underscore the fact that the greatest Black nation on earth is the nation called Nigeria.

Here is a clip from the speech.

In his story, Aanu Adeoye also quotes a “senior presidential adviser” as saying: “Many Nigerians don’t appreciate her [Badenoch] denigrating the country and making it sound like a leper colony. We live here and don’t have that impression of our country.”

Badenoch was born in London, after her mother came to the UK for care in a private maternity hospital, but she was brought up living with her middle-class Nigerian family in Lagos. As a teenager her parents sent her to continue her education in the UK, at a time when military rule made Nigeria an increasingly unattractive option, and Badenoch has lived in the UK ever since.

In speeches Badenoch regularly talks about her Nigerian upbringing, saying that her commitment to conservative and libertarian values is influenced by her horror at what was happening in Lagos when she was growing up – something she associates with the politics of the left.

In her speech to the Conservative party conference earlier this year, Badenoch said:

I was born here, but I grew up in a place where fear was everywhere. You cannot understand it unless you’ve lived it. Triple-checking that all the doors and windows are locked. Waking up in the night at every sound. Listening as you hear your neighbours scream, as they are being burgled and beaten, and wondering if your home will be next.

When you’ve experienced that kind of fear, you’re not worried about being attacked on Twitter. You appreciate how rare and precious it is to live in a country with security, democracy, equality under the law and above all else freedom.

And in a speech only last week in Washington she said:

I was lucky in my experiences. I was born to a relatively wealthy family and had a decent education. But I also know what it is like to be poor. I watched my family become poor as their wealth, income and savings were inflated away by destructive government policies. But they didn’t call it socialism – but it definitely was.

Capital controls, no freedom of movement, government owning the means of production. There was no freedom either, the government deciding which school your child went to, it decided which businesses could or could not operate all the way to arrests with no trial and state-sanctioned murder.

So I know what freedom looks like. It is what I had in the UK. I know the values that can make citizens wealthier and happier and how without them, they become engines of misery and despair.

Asked about Shettima’s comments, a spokesperson for Badenoch said:

Kemi is not interested in doing Nigeria’s PR, she is the leader of the opposition in the UK.

The Scottish government is backing a move to bar politicians from holding dual mandates – by sitting in the Commons and Holyrood at the same time – after the SNP’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn prompted an almighty row when he proposed doing just that after the next Holyrood elections.

The backlash against Flynn was fierce and practically universal last month when he announced he planned to stand for a Holyrood seat – potentially knocking out the incumbent woman MSP – while maintaining his Westminster seat. Not least because of the implication that working as an MSP is not a full-time job. He was forced to u-turn, admitting: “I got this one wrong.”

Now the Scottish government has announced it will support MSPs being disqualified from also sitting in the Commons or Lords, but will first hold a public consultation first, as Holyrood considers amendments to an election reform bill next and after the Scottish Conservatives led calls for a ban.

Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has refused to say whether the government would be willing to make assisted dying free at the point of use for any terminally ill person wanting to take advantage of the legislation.

Last month MPs voted to give the private member’s terminally ill adults (end of life) bill a second reading. But the legislation does not explain who would cover the costs, including time spent by doctors and judges, and the medication needed for someone to end their life.

In an interview with Matt Chorley on Radio 5 Live, Reeves said she was “not convinced” that the bill was going to lead to “higher costs on the public purse”.

But when Chorley said that some costs were inevitable, and asked for details of how those would be funded, Reeves repeated sidestepped those questions. Reeves voted in favour of the bill. But she stressed that the government was neutral, and she said that the bill was still going through the Commons.

Asked directly if, as chancellor, she was willing to fund an assisted dying scheme using taxpayers’ money, Reeves replied:

The assisted dying bill has only just started going through the parliamentary process. I voted for it at a second reading. I think it is right. It now goes through the next stage, but the government is neutral.

Asked if people wanting to take advantage of the legislation might have to pay for the assisted dying process themselves, she replied:

The committee stage and the scrutiny of the bill will answer those questions, the government is neutral on the issue.

Keir Starmer has sent an email to civil servants praising them for their “dedication and professionalism” and saying they should not worry about “upsetting the apple cart” if that is needed to push through change.

The tone of the email is overwhelmingly positive and complimentary, suggesting it is being sent at least in part to repair the damage cause by the line in his speech last week implying civil servants were comfortable embracing declinism. Unions representing civil servants strongly criticised Starmer for what he said.

As Civil Service World reports, Starmer says in today’s email:

From all I have seen during my first five months as prime minister, my appreciation of your service to this country has only grown. It is not just because I know how hard you work. It is because I understand something of what drives your dedication and professionalism. You have this strong sense of public service in everything you do. For you, it’s not just a job. You want to change the country and make Britain a better place. Put simply, I believe we all share the same goal – we have all followed a path towards public service to serve our country.

But if we are honest, we all know that there are far too many obstacles in your way. Too often, needless bureaucratic impediments, silos, processes about processes, all impede your ability – and therefore also my ability – to deliver for the people we are here to serve. And from the conversations that I have had with many of you over the past five months, I know these barriers frustrate you every bit as much as they frustrate me.

Adam Bienkov from Byline Times has posted the full text on social media.

At the committee Labour’s Paul Waugh, a former political correspondent, asked Nandy about the sale of the the Observer to Tortoise Media. He asked about the concerns about the deal raised by staff, including the speed at which it was going through, the fact that rival bidders were not considered and what it might mean for the long-term future of “one of the few progressive newspapers left in the UK”. Pointing out that Nandy’s predecessor, Lucy Frazer, issued a public interest intervention over the proposed sale of the Daily Telegraph, Waugh asked if Nandy had any concerns about this sale.

Nandy said that she could not answer, because as secretary of state she has to act in a quasi-judicial role in matters like this. She said that meant she was “prohibited in law” from talking about some of these matters.

Waugh then asked Nandy to comment on the principles involved. With the sale of a paper like this, what factors would she take into account when assessing the public interest?

Nandy again was reluctant to answer. She turned to her permanent secretary, Susannah Storey, appearing alongside her at the hearing, and Storey said the Enterprise Act included criteria for a public interest test. But she said Nandy should not be discussing specifics in relation to this case.

But Nandy said she was happy to talk about “how we want the media landscape to operate”. She went on:

Plurality is obviously a really important principle. We want to make sure that there are a range of views and voices that can be heard. One of those elements is national media, but there is also local and regional media as well, which I’m particularly exercised about.

I’m shortly to have land on my desk the terms of reference for our local media strategy, which we intend to kick off early in the new year, to make sure that we do have that range of voices reflected in our in our local and national conversation.

As we devolve far more power to communities and to regions, it’s absolutely essential that there’s the ability to hold that power to account. We’ve seen far too many local and regional publications collapse in the last few years. So plurality is the thing that I am most focused on.

Waugh then said transparency was an important issue too. He asked if the public deserve to know who the financial backers were for any bid to take over a national newspaper. (He did not mention the Observer, but this has been a concern with the Tortoise Media bid.)

Nandy said that, under the current regime, some information was put in the public domain, but not all information. (She was talking in general terms, not about the Observer sale.) Storey then repeated the point about the Enterprise Act covering public interest issues. And she said the culture department has just launched a consultation on expanding the legislation around media mergers to include online publications.

Back at the culture committee, Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, is being asked about the BBC, and the future of the licence fee.

She says that “no option is off the table” for the BBC’s charter review, both in terms of the structure of the BBC and its funding model.

She says the government is “not in the business of reform for reform’s sake”.

But she says it is clear that there are limits to what the BBC can raise through commercial sources.

So the government is going to have to look “in the broadest sense” at the options, she says.

Nandy says she knows that 75% of people proscecuted for non-payment of the licence fee are women. She says the government is extending the simple payment plan to make it easier for people to pay in instalments.

And she says she wants to hear what the committee recommends on the future of the BBC.

During the election Keir Starmer said the licence fee would stay in place at least until the BBC’s current charter runs out at the end of 2027.

Nick Candy has given an interview to GB News about his new role as treasurer for Reform UK. (See 10.16am and 12.15pm.) Here are the main points.

• Candy said that he hoped to raise more than £40m for Reform UK. He said:

I think for past general elections, £25m to £40m has been raised for previous parties, and I think I will do significantly better than that, more than £40m.

• He claimed that he had already taken calls from people offering large sums. But he wanted money from small donors too, he said.

Already this morning, I’ve had millions of pounds worth of donations from people that have never donated to a political party in this country. But it’s not just about getting rich donors and billionaire people or whatever, or millionaire people.

Today, we need the guys that have got £1, £5, £10, £25, to be a member of Reform.

• He claimed that Reform UK would overtake the Conservative party in membership numbers in 2025 and that this would be a “gamechanger”.

Reform has 100,000 members now. The Tories have 130,000 members. I’m sure in the next six months Reform will go past the Tory membership and that will be a gamechanger in this country …

Once they start winning some of these local elections and these byelections, it’s going to be a complete gamechanger. My only job is raising the funds to do it properly.

• He said that Farage was “a close, close friend” and that his children called him “Uncle Nigel”.

• He said that, despite saying before the election that it was time for a change and that Keir Starmer was “a decent man”, he did not vote Labour this summer.

Birmingham city council has reached an agreement to settle historical equal pay claims that left the authority with liabilities estimated at £760m and pushed it into effective bankruptcy, Jessica Murray reports.

Councils in England could be driven to bankrupty because the costs of dealing with children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) are rising at an unsustainable rate, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has said in a report.

Summarising the problem, the report says:

The special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system in England has faced unprecedented pressure over the past decade, and without substantial reform it will likely become unmanageable for local authorities over the coming years. Fundamentally, this is due to the rocketing number of children and young people with education, health and care plans (EHCPs). Children with EHCPs are those with the highest needs and local authorities are statutorily obligated to cover the costs of provision set out in EHCPs. The reasons behind this rise in EHCPs are complex, but potential explanations include increased severity of needs, expanded recognition and diagnosis of needs, and stronger incentives to seek statutory provision.

Meaningful reform is likely to be “complex and costly”, it says.

It is likely to require a significant expansion of the core SEND provision available in mainstream schools, an expansion of state-funded special school places, a geographic redistribution of funding, and maybe reducing the statutory obligations currently attached to EHCPs. At the moment, there are huge delays in getting assessments, forcing many parents to get private assessments or go to legal tribunals. Building parental confidence in a new system will therefore be challenging. Any transition to a new system would also be costly as it would likely entail some double funding to cover current obligations. Although difficult, substantial reform is necessary to create a financially sustainable and equitable SEND system. The default is spending an extra £2–3bn per year on an unreformed system by 2027–28.

But, without reform, councils could go bankrupt, the report says.

It is important to restate that the default is for continued rises in numbers of pupils with EHCPs, extra spending of £2–3bn per year and local authority deficits of £8 billion in three years’ time, pushing many to the point of bankruptcy.

Back at the culture committee, Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, says she has seen too many examples of people in the creative industries who are victims of mistreatment at work feeling that they cannot complain because of the power wielded by stars who misbehave. Referring to the Gregg Wallace allegations, she says there have been too many cases of complaints being “swept under the rug”.

She says she is meeting the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA) tomorrow. She goes on:

I instinctively think that it is better if the industry grips this, but if they don’t, I will be prepared to take further action.

She says she has looked at various examples of misconduct cases and she is worried that nothing seems to change.

One of the things that has really concerned me is that when we’ve looked across the board at repeated instances of where people have spoken up, made complaints that have been swept under the rug, and it’s only ended up in resulting in action when they’ve gone to the media – you can look at the inquiries into all of those occasions, and every time the recommendations are the same. And yet here we still are, with these things happening on a regular occurrence.

UPDATE: Nandy said:

Having spoken with the BBC in recent weeks about the Gregg Wallace allegations, I am really clear that we’re seeing too many of these cultures of silence and issues being swept under the rug.

People who cannot advance through the current complaints system because it would have an impact on their career, potentially ending their career.

And I am clear that people need to be heard, action has to be taken and perpetrators have to be held to account …

[The Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority] think, and I instinctively think, that it is better if the industry grips this, but if they don’t I will be prepared to take further action.

The Green party has said that the 5% efficiency savings that Rachel Reeves is demanding in her spending review will lead to cuts to services. In a statement, Adrian Ramsay, the party’s co-leader, said:

Labour call their 5% cuts across government departments “efficiency savings.

We call it what it is: cuts to services.

This amounts to the continuation of the same damaging, unpopular and unnecessary policy that has, under successive governments, so devastated our country over many years.

Instead of stripping more money from essential front-line services that are already on their knees, Labour could and should look to tax the very richest more to raise crucial funds.

This could act as a lifeline for key services such as our NHS.

We remain clear, cutting services always was and still is, a political choice.

The billionaire property developer Nick Candy has said he will give at last £1m to Reform UK.

At a photocall with Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, to mark his defection to the party and his appointment at party treasurer (see 10.16am), Candy was asked whether he would be donating any of his own money to the party.

“Of course,” he replied.

Asked how much, he said he would be giving a “seven-figure sum”.

When reporters asked Farage if Candy’s appointment meant Reform UK was now the party of party of millionaires and billionaires, Farage replied:

No, we haven’t sold a single peerage.

We need ammunition. We can’t fight big national campaigns without the money.

Asked about claims that Elon Musk might donate $100m to the party, a claim that Musk has denied, Farage said that he did not know anything about that, but that if he were offered a legal donation from Musk, the world’s richest man, he would take it.

Labour won 34% of the vote at the general election, but 63% of the seats being contested, and many commentators have pointed out that the first past the post electoral system delivered the most disproportional result in British political history.

But the Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for electoral reform, has today published a report saying the result was “one of the most disproportional seen anywhere in the world”.

In a summary, it says:

A new report on this year’s general election from the ERS shows that the parties’ votes have shifted more than at any time since 1931, with voters more willing than ever to ‘shop around’ and vote for smaller parties than in any other election in modern times.
As a result, this election saw a number of firsts such as being the first UK election where four parties received over 10% of the vote, five parties received over 5% of the vote and Labour and the Conservatives received their lowest combined vote share (57.4%) in the era of universal suffrage. The historically disproportional result also highlighted how the current first past the post electoral system, which is designed to work largely as a two-party system, is struggling with the shift towards multiparty voting and is producing erratic results where parties receive seats far out of proportion to the share of the votes that they won. Notably, Labour received a whopping 63.2% of seats on just 33.7% of the vote, meaning a 1.6% increase in the party’s 2019 vote-share saw it more than double its seats in parliament to 411. At the other end of the spectrum, Reform UK and the Green party received just over 1% (1.4%) of the seats between them, after winning more than 20% of the vote combined.

This graphic contains some other striking figures from the report.

Commenting on the report, Darren Hughes, chief executive of the ERS, said:

Our current two-party voting system is struggling to cope with this new multi-party reality and has produced a parliament that least resembles how the country actually voted in British history.
This will not help trust in politics, which is at an historic low [3], and is why we need to move to a fairer, proportional voting system that would accurately reflect how the country voted before the next election.

Keir Starmer said the UK-Cyprus relationship could be taken to “an even stronger level” as he met the country’s president in Nicosia for talks on the Middle East amid fresh upheaval in Syria, PA Media reports. PA says:

Starmer’s meeting with Cypriot leader Nikos Christodoulides was the first of its kind in 53 years.

The two men described the meeting as “historic”, with the prime minister saying it had been “far too long” since a British premier had made a bilateral visit to Cyprus.

“Please take it as a statement of my intent that our already strong relationship, the partnership between our countries – strong historically, strong because of the ties that we’ve had people-to-people for many, many years and common interests – can be taken to an even stronger level between us,” he said.

Christodoulides said the meeting was “testament to our strong political will to work together to enhance our bilateral relationship” on matters including defence, security and trade.

Starmer is the first British prime minister to visit Cyprus since Edward Heath in 1971.

Rachel Reeves has rejected Lib Dem criticism (see 10.33am) that she is neglecting social care. She told broadcasters:

For our NHS to work effectively we need a social care system that works.

That’s why, at the budget, I put £600m into investment in social care.

That’s why we are introducing a fair pay agreement to improve recruitment and retention in our social care system to help carers looking after some of the most vulnerable people in society.

So we committed to a national care service, and we know that having a care system that works properly is crucial for our National Health Service, too.

The government has announced a £2bn boost to investment in early years education compared to last year, including a 45% uplift to early years pupil premium (EYPP) for the most disadvantaged children.

It is part of the prime minister’s plan for change, outlined last week, which included his ambition to increase the proportion of children who are “school-ready”, achieving a good level of development, to 75% by 2028.

The additional money increases early years investment by more than 30% on last year, bringing total spend to £8bn, and is intended to support the next stage of the roll-out of 30 hours of funded childcare for eligible parents from next September.

Hourly funding rates for providers will rise, on average, to £11.54 for children under two, £8.53 for two-year-olds and £6.12 for three and four-year-olds, while the EYPP rise to up to £570 per child.

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said:

High quality early education is the cornerstone of our promise to ensure tens of thousands of children are school ready every year, as part of the government’s plan for change.

The early years has been my priority from day one, because by giving more children the chance to start school ready to go, we transform their life chances, and the life chances of every child in their classroom.

But Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA) said the new hourly funding rates would not even cover the statutory wage increases. She said:

Since 2019 minimum wages have shot up by 66–70% but average funding rates have only risen by 32%. On top of this the national insurance contributions increase is going to cripple providers and the only way they can cover these costs is by increasing parental fees.

We do welcome the increase in early years pupil premium to £570 which is something we have been campaigning for. It is good to see this uplift, but it is still not at the level of primary school pupil premium which is currently £1,455. The government’s rhetoric about early years must match their investment which saves millions in a child’s later years.

Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has said she has “no doubt” government deparments can find efficiency savings worth 5%. On a hospital visit today she told broadcasters:

I have no doubt that we can find efficiency savings within government spending of 5% and I’m determined to do so. Because it’s through finding those efficiency savings that we will have the money to spend on the priorities of the British people.

So part of this spending review will be cracking down on waste, cracking down on non-priority spending, so that we can focus on the issues – whether that is improving living standards, ensuring our streets are safe, or indeed reducing waiting times in the NHS.

Those are the people’s priorities, and that is what we will be focusing on in the spending review.

The wealthy property developer and former Conservative party donor Nick Candy has announced that he has joined Reform UK. He has also become the party’s treasurer.

In a statement issued by Reform UK, Candy said:

I have today resigned my membership of the Conservative party after many years of active support and substantial donations to the party. I am sorry to say there have been too many broken promises and a complete breach of trust with the wealth creators in our country.

Nigel Farage is a close personal friend of mine, and Reform UK represents the future of British politics. I am pleased to announce that I will now become the treasurer for Reform UK and intend to raise enough funds for them to win the next general election. I will take up the role in the new year.

Candy joined the Conservative party in 2009 and has donated at least £290,000 to it. But he was giving up on it well before the election. In February he gave an interview saying it was “probably time for a change” and that Keir Starmer was “a decent man with good values and good morals”.

Candy is married to the former pop star Holly Valance, who has become an increasingly prominent Farage ally and radical right campaigner.

Commenting on Candy’s move, Farage said:

I warmly welcome this decision. We are the fastest-growing movement in British politics today, and Nick’s efforts will help Reform UK transform our country.

Germany has pledged to tighten its law to make it easier to prosecute people-smugglers enabling small-boat crossings to Britain, as the two countries signed a new deal aimed at tackling immigration crime, PA Media reports. PA says:

Berlin confirmed plans to reform its legal framework make it a clear criminal offence to “facilitate the smuggling of migrants to the UK” as part of the agreement, the Home Office said.

The Home Office said the move would give German prosecutors more tools to tackle the supply and storage of dangerous small boats.

Both countries will also commit to exchange information that may help to remove migrant-smuggling content from social media platforms and tackle end-to-end routes of criminal smuggling networks as part of the deal.

The announcement came ahead of the UK and Germany hosting the so-called Calais Group in London today. This involves ministers and police from the two countries, alongside France, Belgium and the Netherlands, gathering to discuss migration in Europe. Delegates are expected to agree a detailed plan to tackle people-smuggling gangs in 2025.

The Home Office would like to facilitate the return of refugees to Syria, a minister has said, saying about 6,500 asylum claims had been suspended as the government waited to assess the fallout from the end of the Assad regime. As Jessica Elgot reports, the immigration minister Angela Eagle said many refugees had been fleeing from the persecution and torture inflicted by Bashar al-Assad’s regime and said that if people wished to return to Syria from the UK “we’d certainly like to facilitate that”. Jess’s full story is here.

Keir Starmer is address British troops at the RAF Akrotiri base in Cyprus.

He starts by saying is there to say thank you. And he says there are many people in the UK who would also like to be saying thank you to them. They can’t be here, he says. But he says he is conveying that message on their behalf.

He says members of the armed forces serve year in, year out. But this year it has been particularly intense, he says. He refers to work related to Gaza, and to the evacuation plan getting Britons out of Lebanon.

He says the plans changed, but he was confirmed that he could rely on the military in any circumstances. He had “complete faith” in them, he says. And that meant he could go into meetings with other leaders with complete confidence that the UK could deliver.

Good morning. Today is the launch of the spending review. And the prime minister has been writing about the process.

Every secretary of state inherits dozens of projects and priorities from his or her predecessor, and a huge quantity of government activity is therefore being carried out even if it is no longer necessary or relevant. In one of my very first cabinets, I told them all to go through their budget lines and cut at least 5%. ‘It’s time to slaughter the sacred cows,’ I said.

But that was not the current prime minister. That was Boris Johnson, in his memoirs.

As Heather Stewart, Kalyeena Makortoff and Richard Partington in their overnight story, Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is also asking cabinet ministers to find efficiency savings equivalent to 5% of spending. That does not mean that her policy on public spending is exactly the same as Johnson’s. But this does illustrate how this is a process that most governments end up going through.

Efficiency savings of 5% does not have to mean spending cuts worth 5%. Reeves has already announced that overall day-to-day government spending is due to rise by 1.5% a year in real terms. Efficiency savings (which often feel like cuts) in one area of departmental spending can free up money that can be spent in other areas.

But that does not mean the process will be painless. In its news release, the Treasury says ministers are being told the spending not contributing to a government priority should be stopped.

Secretaries of state across government will need to allocate their budgets to ensure that government spending is focused on the prime minister’s Plan for Change, and that every pound of taxpayers’ money is spent well. The chancellor will work with departments to prioritise spending that supports the milestones to deliver the plan …

In letters sent by the chief secretary to the Treasury, departments will be advised that where spending is not contributing to a priority, it should be stopped. Although some of these decisions will be difficult, the chancellor is clear that the public must have trust in the government that it is rooting out waste and that their taxes are being spent on their priorities.

The Treasury also gives an example of what this might mean.

Work has already begun on evaluating poor value for money spend, with an evaluation into the £6.5m spent on Social Workers in Schools programme, which placed social workers in schools, finding no evidence of positive impact on social care outcomes, meaning the intervention was not considered cost-effective. The government has made clear it will not shy away from taking the difficult decisions needed to fix the foundations, as shown by the chancellor’s decisions at the budget to balance the books.

The Social Workers in Schools progamme was an initiative started under a previous PM – one Boris Johnson. As he would put it, it’s now being slaughtered as a sacred cow.

Reeves is speaking at an event at a hospital this morning, so we will hear more from her soon. And we will hear more about the Plan for Change, because Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister who oversees the plan, is giving evidence to committee later. It is one of several interesting hearings on the committee corridor.

Here is the agenda for the day.

Morning: Keir Starmer is in Cyprus, where he has a meeting with Nikos Christodoulides, the president, and addressing British troops at RAF Akrotiri.

Morning: Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, and Darren Jones, chief secretary to the Treasury, are visiting a hospital in Kent.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

12.30pm: MLAs (member of the legislative assembly in Northern Ireland) start a debate on whether or not to continue with the Windsor Framework post-Brexit trading rules.

1pm: Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, gives evidence to the Commons culture committee about the work of her department.

2.30pm: Douglas Alexander, a trade minister, Stephen Doughty, a Foreign Office minister, and Lord Coaker, a defence minister, give evidence to the business committee about arms sales to Israel.

2.30pm: Chief constables from South Yorkshire police, Cleveland police, Staffordshire police and Humberside police give evidence to the home affairs committee about the summer riots.

3pm: Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister, gives evidence to the public administration and constitutional affairs committee about the work of the Cabinet Office.

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.

If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I have still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.

I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.