The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has rejected the government's assessment that the package of measures, including narrowing the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments (PIP), will save £5bn. Politics latest: Ex-Labour leader says Starmer 'an enormous disappointment' The fiscal watchdog put the value of the cuts at £3.4bn, leaving ministers scrambling to find further savings. Ms Reeves is now expected to announce that universal credit (UC) incapacity benefits for new claimants, which were halved under the original plan, will also be frozen until 2030 rather than rising in line with inflation. As originally reported by The Times, there will also be a small reduction in the basic rate of UC in 2029, with the new measures expected to raise £500m. A Whitehall source told Sky's political editor Beth Rigby that it is "hard to tell how MPs will react", as while the OBR's assessment means fewer people will be affected by the PIP changes than thought, they "might be unhappy about the chaotic nature of it all". The government did not publish an impact assessment of the crackdown on benefits it announced last week, saying that would come alongside the spring statement on Wednesday. Several Labour MPs criticised the measures as pushing more sick and disabled people into poverty, while former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called the package a "disgrace" on Tuesday and accused the government of imposing austerity on the country. Watch and follow the spring statement live across Sky News from 11am Spending cuts expected Ms Reeves is expected to announce a large package of departmental spending cuts when she gives an update on the economy on Wednesday, potentially putting her on a further collision course with her own MPs. Having only committed to doing one proper budget each year in the autumn, the spring statement was meant to be a low-key affair. However, a turbulent economic climate since October means the OBR is widely expected to downgrade its growth forecasts for the UK while the government has borrowed more than previously expected. This has wiped out the £9.9bn gap in her fiscal headroom Ms Reeves left herself at her budget last year - money she needs to make up if she wants to stick to her self-imposed fiscal rule that day-to-day spending must be funded through tax receipts, not debt, by 2029-30. The chancellor has sought to blame global factors but the Conservatives blame measures like the national insurance tax hike on employers, saying this is choking business. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride urged Ms Reeves to "use the emergency budget" to "fix her own mistakes and end Labour's war on enterprise". Ms Reeves will defend her record in the spring statement, saying she is "proud" of what Labour has achieved in its first nine months in office. However, on the eve of the statement, polling showed the public is pessimistic about what is to come. According to More in Common, half think the cost of living crisis will never end, while YouGov found three-quarters of people want to see a tax on the richest over spending cuts. Ms Reeves is not expected to announce any tax hikes, having said her tax-raising budget in October was a once-in-a-parliament event. Read more:Chancellor can make decisions now without too much falloutExpect different focus from Reeves at spring statement Defence increase to 'deliver security' In a bid to fend off criticism, she will also announce an extra £2.2bn will be spent on defence over the next year to "deliver security for working people". The money is part of the government's aim to hike defence spending to 2.5% of the UK's economic output by 2027 - up from the 2.3% where it stands now. Ms Reeves will insist this plan, set out by the prime minister in February, was the "right decision" against the backdrop of global instability, saying it will put "an extra 6.4bn into the defence budget by 2027". "This increase in investment is not just about increasing our national security but increasing our economic security, too," she will say. The money is coming from reductions to the international aid budget and Treasury reserves, and will be used to invest in new technology, refurbish homes for military families and upgrade HM Naval Base Portsmouth.

The idea was that in the late 2020s, the old ideas about the way we run the economy would or should give way to a new model. For a long time, we ignored where something was made and by whom and just ordered it in from the cheapest source. For a long time, we ignored the security consequences of where we got our energy from. The upshot of these assumptions was that over time, we allowed our manufacturing base to become hollowed out, unable to compete with cheap imports from China. We allowed our energy system to become ever more dependent on cheap Russian gas. Politics latest: Follow spring statement updates The whole point of securonomics was that it matters where something is made and who owns it. And not just that - that revitalising manufacturing and energy could help revitalise "left-behind" corners of the economy, places like the Midlands and the North East. Back when she came up with the coinage, Joe Biden was in power and was pumping billions of dollars into the US economy via the Inflation Reduction Act - a scheme designed to encourage green tech investment. So securonomics looked a little like the British version of Bidenomics. That's the key point: the "security" part of "securonomics" was mostly about energy security and supply chain security rather than about defence. Watch and follow the spring statement live across Sky News from 11am But when Rachel Reeves became chancellor, it looked for a period as if securonomics was dead on arrival. Most glaringly, Labour dramatically trimmed back the ambition and scale of its green investment plans. But roll on a year or so, and we all know what happened next. A new era The Democrats lost, Donald Trump won, came into office and swiftly triggered a chain reaction that panicked everyone in Europe into investing more in defence. Today, much of the focus among investors is not on net zero but on defence. All of which is to say, securonomics might be about to resurface, but in a markedly different guise. In the spring statement, I expect the chancellor to bring back this buzzword, but this time, the emphasis will not be on green tech but on something else: the defence sector. Expect to hear about weapons This time around, the chancellor will say securonomics 2.0, which is to say government investment in the defence sector will also bring an economic windfall, as old naval ports like Plymouth and Portsmouth see regeneration. This time, the focus will not be on solar and wind but on submarines and weapons. Whether this rendition of securonomics is any more successful than the last remains to be seen. For the chancellor hardly has an enormous amount of money left to invest. While this week's event is billed as a mere forecast update, the reality, when you take a step back, is more serious. Read more:What you need to know about the spring statement The chancellor will have to acknowledge that, without remedial action, she would have broken her fiscal rules. She will have to confirm significant changes to policy to rebuild the "headroom" against these rules. These will stop short of tax rises. Instead, the spending envelope in future years will be trimmed (think 1.1% or so spending increases rather than 1.3% or 1.4%). Those welfare reforms announced last week will bring in a bit of extra cash. And thanks to an accounting quirk, the decision (announced a few weeks ago) to shift development spending into defence will also give her a bit more space against her rules. The austerity question But even these changes will raise further awkward questions: is this or is this not austerity? Certainly, for some departments, that spending cut will involve further significant sacrifices. Are those benefits gains really achievable, and at what cost? And, most ominously, what if the chancellor has to come back to parliament in another six months and admit she's broken her rules all over again? The return of securonomics might be the theme she wants to focus on in the coming months - but that, too, depends on having money to invest - and the UK's fiscal position looks as tight as ever.

The charge, which has been brought under section 66A of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, relates to an image that was posted on social media in April last year. The act makes it illegal to intentionally share sexual images of someone without their consent, with the aim of causing alarm, distress, or humiliation, or for sexual gratification. Presenter Narinder Kaur - who has waived her right to anonymity - alleges the image shows her as she got out of a taxi in 1996, and was taken without her knowledge and consent. Kaur, 52, reported the image when it was shared online, triggering an 11-month investigation by the Metropolitan Police. She has previously said she felt "violated, humiliated and degraded" by the incident. Fox, 46, who has recently attempted to enter the world of politics, will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 24 April, where he is expected to enter a plea. If convicted, he faces up to two years in prison and could be placed on the Sex Offenders Register. The Metropolitan Police told Sky News in a statement: "A man has been charged with a sexual offence following an investigation by the Metropolitan Police. "Laurence Fox, 46, will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 24 April charged with an offence contrary to section 66A of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. "The charge relates to an image that was posted on social media platform in April 2024."

But the enormity of what she is saying will be lost on no one as the chancellor sets out the grim reality of the country's finances. Her economic update to the House of Commons will reveal a deteriorating economic outlook and rising borrowing costs, which has forced her to find spending cuts, which she's left others to carry the can for (more on that in a bit). Politics latest: Polling suggests almost everyone is pessimistic The independent Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) is expected to forecast that growth for 2025 has halved from 2% to 1%. That, combined with rising debt repayment costs on government borrowing, has left the chancellor with a black hole in the public finances against the forecasts published at the budget in October. Back then, Reeves had a £9.9bn cushion against her "iron-clad" fiscal rule that day-to-day spending must be funded through tax receipts not debt by 2029-30. But that surplus has been wiped out in the ensuing six months - now she finds herself about £4bn in the red, according to those familiar with the forecasts. That's really uncomfortable for a chancellor who just months ago executed the biggest tax and spend budget in a generation with the promise that she would get the economy growing again. At the first progress check, she looks to be failing and has been forced into finding spending cuts to make up the shortfall after ruling out her other two options - further tax rises or more borrowing via a loosening of her self-imposed fiscal rules. Watch and follow the spring statement live across Sky News from 11am 'World has changed' When Reeves gets up on Wednesday, she will put it differently, saying the "world has changed" and all that means is the government must move "further and faster" to deliver the reforms that will drive growth. But her opponents will be quick to lay economic woes at her door, arguing that the unexpected £25bn tax hike on employers' national insurance contributions last October have choked off growth. But it's not just opposition from the Conservative benches that the chancellor is facing - it is opposition from within as she sets about cutting government spending to the tune of £15bn to fill that black hole. Politically, her allies know how awkward it would have been for the chancellor to announce £5bn in welfare cuts to avoid breaking her own fiscal rules, with one acknowledging that those cuts had to be kept separate from the spring statement. There's also expected to be more than £5bn of extra cuts from public spending in the forecast period, which could see departments that don't have protected budgets - education, justice, home - face real-term spending cuts by the end of the decade. Not an emergency budget We won't see the detail of that until the Spending Review in June. This is not an emergency budget because the chancellor isn't embarking on a round of tax raising to fix the public finances. But these are, however they are framed, emergency spending cuts designed to plug her black hole and that is politically difficult for a government that has promised no return to austerity if some parts of the public sector face deep cuts to stick with fiscal rules. If that's the macro picture, what about the "everyday economics" of peoples' lives? I'd point out two things here. On Wednesday, we will get to see where those £5bn of welfare cuts will fall as the government publishes the impact assessment that it held back last week. Read more:Corbyn brands benefit cuts a 'disgrace'Expect different focus from Reeves at spring statement Up to a million people could be affected by cuts, and the reality of who will be hit will pile on the pressure for Labour MPs already uncomfortable with cuts to health and disability benefits. The second point is whether the government remains on course to deliver its key pledge to "put more money in the pockets of working people" during this parliament after the Joseph Rowntree Foundation think-tank produced analysis over the weekend saying living standards for all UK families are set to fall by 2030. The chancellor told my colleague Trevor Phillips on Sunday that she "rejects" the analysis that the average family could be £1,400 worse off by 2030. But that doesn't mean that the forecasts published on Wednesday calculating real household disposable income per head won't make for grim reading as the economic outlook deteriorates. Nervousness in Labour Ask around the party, and there is obvious nervousness about how this might land, with a degree of anxiety about the economic outlook and what that has in store for departmental budgets. But there is recognition too from many MPs that the government has political space afforded by that whopping majority, to make these decisions on spending cuts without too much fallout - for now. Because while Wednesday will be bad, worse could be yet to come. Staring down the barrel The chancellor is staring down the barrel of a possible global trade war that will only serve to create more economic uncertainty, even if the UK is spared from the worst tariffs by President Donald Trump. The national insurance hike is also set to kick in next month, with employers across the piece sounding the warnings around investment, jobs and growth. Six months ago, Reeves said she wouldn't be coming back for more after she announced £40bn in tax rises in that massive first budget. Six months on she is coming back for more, this time in the form of spending cuts. And in six months' time, she may well have to come back for more in the form of tax rises or deeper cuts. The spring statement was meant to be a run-of-the-mill economic update, but it has morphed into much more. The chancellor now has to make the hard sell from a very hard place, that could soon become even tougher still.

An initial two-year "backstop" will now increase to four years after the change was proposed by Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. Ms Leadbeater said she was disappointed to propose the extension and acknowledged the "upset" felt by some supporters of the bill, but said it was "more important to do this properly than to do it quickly". The four-year delay, passed by the committee scrutinising the legislation, now means the law is unlikely to be operational until at least 2029 - the year by which the next general election must take place. After the vote in the early hours of Wednesday, Ms Leadbeater said the bill will come back to the Commons in a "safer, fairer, and more workable" form. MPs on the committee also voted for assisted dying to be available free on the NHS. One MP said the extension of the backstop risked the bill being abandoned. Tom Gordon, a Liberal Democrat MP, told The Guardian that "delaying implementation risks pushing it beyond the next election, where it could be abandoned altogether". "We have thoroughly scrutinised and strengthened this bill, ensuring it is safe and robust. Every extra year means more unnecessary suffering for those who cannot afford to wait," Mr Gordon said. The charity Humanists UK, which backs the assisted dying bill, said it regretted the delay. Its chief executive Andrew Copson said: "Many other countries already have safe assisted dying laws and none of them has taken more than 19 months to implement them, apart from one that was subject to a court challenge. "So it really shouldn't have to take four years for the one here. If it does, people who need this change in law will continue to die in ways not of their choosing." But Conservative MP Danny Kruger argued that the bill was a fundamental change to the founding principles of the NHS, which he said would become the "national health and assisted suicide service". Read more:What is in the legislation?Assisted dying is the biggest societal change in 50 years The overnight vote marks the end of two months of committee scrutiny, and the bill is likely to return for a debate and vote by all MPs in the coming months. Opponents of the bill have warned that people could be put under pressure to end their lives. But supporters have said the law will allow people suffering with difficult illnesses the choice over when to end their lives. Last month, Ms Leadbeater removed a key safeguard that said every assisted dying case must be scrutinised by a High Court justice. Citing concerns this could overwhelm the court system, Ms Leadbeater instead proposed that cases will be reviewed by panels including a senior lawyer, a psychiatrist, and a social worker. The bill would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales who are expected to die within six months to request assistance from a doctor to end their life. MPs initially voted in support of the bill in November, with 330 MPs supporting it and 275 rejecting it. Meanwhile, the Isle of Man's parliament became the first part of the British Isles to pass assisted dying legislation. Its assisted dying bill will be sent for royal assent, having had its final reading by members of the legislative council on Tuesday. The bill, for adults resident on the island for five years who have a terminal illness with a life expectancy of no more than 12 months, could formally become law later this year with an assisted dying service potentially in place by 2027.