I first encountered whale poop 30 years ago while I was working on a right whale research project. On one of my first days on the water, in the Bay of Fundy, in eastern Canada, we came upon a feeding male right whale with mud on its head – or bonnet – a sign that it had been feeding at the bottom of the bay. It had come up to breathe and rest.

Just before it dived in again, it released this enormous faecal plume.

There were gallons of poop in that water. It looked like red floating bricks. The smell was overwhelming. Some whale poop smells like brine and seawater, but with right whales, there’s a strong smell of sulphur.

If you get that poop on your clothes, you have to throw them away. You’re never going to wash it out.

I didn’t know it then, but that faecal plume would later spark my global search for whale faeces, from Iceland to Mexico, Alaska and Hawaii.

Since then, I’ve learned that whale faeces can tell us not only about the diet of a whale, but also about their hormones and reproductive status. It can reveal the whale’s stress levels, gut microbiome and genetic lineage. It even allows us to look at the level of mercury and pollution in the ocean – everything from microplastics to parasite loads.

Ambergris, which is formed in the hindgut of sperm whales when they digest squid beaks, is rare and extremely valuable. Since the 1970s, its trade has been restricted in many countries. But in the past, it was used to make perfumes, which were worn by Elizabeth I, Charles I and Casanova.

Whale faecal plumes can be neon green or bright red. At times, they sparkle with silver scales, like the sun glinting on the water. Every whale defecation is unique.

As for the smell, the poop of right whales is the strongest and foulest but I love the smell now.

It helped set the course for my research career. Two years after I saw whale poop for the first time, I took my first class in marine ecology and learned about one of the most important processes in the ocean, especially in carbon sequestration: the biological pump.

Phytoplankton, or algae, only grow near the surface of the ocean, where there is enough light for photosynthesis. Animals such as krill and copepods feed on it there and they are eaten by fish and even whales.

When this phytoplankton dies or is consumed, some of those nutrients are removed from the atmosphere and can sink to the bottom of the ocean. In this way, the biological pump plays an important role in moving carbon to the deep sea.

But I remember sitting there in class that day, thinking: there’s something missing here. Right whales often feed at depth and poop at the surface, so they’re likely bringing important nutrients like nitrogen, phosphorus and iron back up to the surface.

That set me off on the idea of a “whale pump” – which we’ve since discovered does the opposite of the biological pump. It pumps nutrients back up to the surface.

These nutrients can get picked up by phytoplankton and go through the entire ocean food chain. This is important because one of the justifications for whaling in Japan, Norway and Iceland is that whales eat “our fish”, therefore if there are too many whales, there will be a decline in fisheries.

The whale pump demonstrates it’s more complicated than that – and that the presence of whales in the ocean might actually increase fish populations.

As well as helping us to understand the state of the present ocean, whale poop gives us a glimpse into the past ocean and what it was like when there were hundreds of thousands of whales in the sea. If we can restore whales and the nutrient pathways that historically existed through their poop, it could help support more biodiversity in the ocean.

As told to Donna Ferguson

Governments risk another decade of failure on biodiversity loss, due to the slow implementation of an international agreement to halt the destruction of Earth’s ecosystems, experts have warned.

Less than two years ago, the world reached a historic agreement at the Cop15 summit in Montreal to stop the human-caused destruction of life on our planet. The deal included targets to protect 30% of the planet for nature by the end of the decade (30×30), reform $500bn (then £410bn) of environmentally damaging subsidies, and begin restoring 30% of the planet’s degraded ecosystems.

But as country representatives dig into their second week of negotiations at Cop16 in Cali, Colombia – their first meeting since Montreal – alarm is growing at the lack of concrete progress on any of the major targets they agreed upon. An increasing number of indicators show that governments are not on track. They still need to protect an area of land equivalent to the combined size of Brazil and Australia, and an expanse of sea larger than the Indian Ocean to meet the headline 30×30 target, according to a new UN report.

Weak progress on funding for nature and almost no progress on subsidy reform have also frustrated observers. At the time of publication, 158 countries are yet to submit formal plans on how they are going to meet the targets, according to Carbon Brief, missing their deadline this month ahead of the biodiversity summit in Cali, where governments are not likely to set a new deadline.

“Progress has been too slow. I think political prioritisation of nature is still too low. This is reflected by progress on the targets. Several target are very easy to measure: 30×30 has metrics on area and quality, finance has a dollar figure. We have new data on both that show we’re not on pace,” said Brian O’Donnell, director of the Campaign for Nature.

“This is a moment to demonstrate seriousness and build trust. On finance especially, it’s been disturbing at times to go to parties to ask for their path forward for finance and be treated as if we are asking for something new or unrealistic, as opposed to what they just agreed two years ago. To me, that is a reflection of not a true commitment to this,” he said.

The world has never met a target to stem the destruction of wildlife and life-sustaining ecosystems. Amid growing scientific warnings about the state of life on Earth, there has been a major push to make sure this decade is different, and that governments comply with targets designed to prevent wildlife extinctions, such as cuts to pesticides use and pollution.

Leading figures in conservation and science have raised concerns about the progress governments are making towards the targets in Cali. Martin Harper, CEO of Birdlife International, said meaningful action on commitments was vital.

“We cannot accept inaction as the new normal. This means more action to bolster efforts to recover threatened species, to protect and restore more land, fresh water and sea, and to transform our food, energy and industrial systems. We have five years to raise hundreds of billions of dollars. If we don’t see it materialise, I dread to think where we will be in 2030,” he said.

Inger Andersen, the UN environment head, said it was too early to say whether governments were not doing enough to meet the targets, underscoring that many were working hard. She said there had been signs of progress, but acknowledged more needed to be done.

“The world is working on it. Will we meet every single target by 2030? I hope. If we don’t, is that a catastrophe? No, but did we make a promise to each other that we are going to stretch and do the very best that we can,” she said. “We still have six years to go.”

Scientists at the nature summit in Cali said that the political pace was not matching the scale of the challenge. Nathalie Seddon, professor of biodiversity at University of Oxford, said much more was needed by the end of the decade.

“The biodiversity goals’ 2030 deadline exists for a reason: biodiverse, resilient ecosystems are the foundation of our economies and wellbeing. A bad outcome here isn’t just bad news for wildlife; it undermines food security, water quality, disaster resilience and economic stability. It worsens climate impacts of record-breaking heat, wildfires, floods and droughts,” she said.

Yadvinder Malhi, a professor of ecosystem science at the University of Oxford, said: “The very limited progress we’ve seen so far in the negotiations at Cop16 is insufficient to address the very real implications of getting this wrong. Biodiversity is continuing to decline at an alarming rate. I really hope that the crunch discussions this week yield those commitments, for the sake of a flourishing future for people and for our planet.”

A judge ordered all parties, including Elon Musk, to attend a court hearing in Philadelphia on Thursday in a lawsuit seeking to stop a political action committee controlled by the billionaire from awarding $1m to registered US voters in battleground states before the 5 November election.

The Philadelphia district attorney’s office filed the lawsuit on Monday. It called the giveaway by Musk’s America Pac, which backs Donald Trump, an “illegal lottery” that entices Pennsylvania residents to share personal data.

“It is further ordered that all parties must be present at the time of the hearing,” a judge wrote on Wednesday in an order with the county court of common pleas. The hearing in the case was moved up to Thursday morning from Friday.

A representative for America Pac did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Musk’s representatives have not responded to requests for comment.

Musk has promised to give $1m each day to someone who signs his online free-speech and gun-rights petition. Legal experts consulted by Reuters last week were divided on whether the giveaway violates federal laws that make it a crime to pay or offer to pay a person to register to vote. The justice department sent a letter to America Pac warning that the billionaire’s giveaways for registered voters who sign his petition may violate federal law, CNN reported last week.

Before an extremely tight presidential race between Trump and Kamala Harris, Pennsylvania is seen as a crucial swing state that could determine the outcome of the election. “Pennsylvania will be a decisive Republican victory,” Musk tweeted on Wednesday.

Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania’s Democratic governor, said earlier this month that he thought law enforcement should look into the legality of the giveaway.

“I think there are real questions with how he is spending money in this race, how the dark money is flowing, not just into Pennsylvania, but apparently now into the pockets of Pennsylvanians,” Shapiro told NBC’s Meet the Press on 20 October. “That is deeply concerning.”

At a Musk town hall in Pittsburgh on 20 October, at which the Tesla CEO praised Trump and gave a giant $1m check to a woman in a red Trump T-shirt, audience members appeared unfazed by the criticism of the scheme, and said they admired Musk’s success as a businessman, and what they saw as his championing of free speech.

“I fear if Trump does not win, we are going to have a single-party state that is going to be like California, but actually worse,” Musk told the audience.

Musk has shared photographs of voters with $1m checks on X, the social media platform he owns. On Wednesday, the America Pac account announced that “Joshua from North Carolina earned $1M after signing our petition in support of the Constitution”.

The Trump campaign is broadly reliant on outside groups for canvassing voters, meaning the super Pac founded by Musk – the world’s richest man – plays an outsized role in what is expected to be a razor-thin election.

In the days leading up to the election, mysterious monuments continue to pop up in cities across the US, poking fun at candidate Donald Trump and his supporters.

On Wednesday in Maja Park in Philadelphia, a large statue of Trump was propped up. Titled “In Honor of a Lifetime of Sexual Assault”, the monument, showing Trump smiling and holding his hand in a suggestive manner, quotes from the infamous 2005 recording – leaked in 2016 – in which Trump is heard bragging about sexually assaulting women.

The monument was quickly removed, Philly Voice reported.

On Sunday, a similar satirical statue was found in Portland, Oregon. It was beheaded that day and further damaged by a Portland city council candidate and Trump supporter, who filmed himself chipping away at the base of the statue.

Underneath the statues in Philadelphia and Portland is a plaque with Trump’s brag about his status and how it allows him to sexually assault women: “I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”

The two statues, in Philadelphia and Portland, were placed behind, and next to, nude sculptures sanctioned by the respective cities.

The Access Hollywood tape was recorded in 2005 and published by the Washington Post in 2016, a month before that year’s election. The tape’s release shook up the election, with some Republicans withdrawing their support for Trump.

Although Trump has never been criminally charged for sexual offenses, 27 women have accused him of sexual assault. Last year, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing writer E Jean Carroll in a civil suit.

The recent Philadelphia and Portland statues follow other satirical Trump-related statues, found throughout the country.

In Washington on Monday, a tiki torch statue titled “The Donald J Trump Enduring Flame” was placed a few blocks away from the White House. The statue evokes the white nationalist Unite the Right rally from 2017, in which neo-Nazis marched in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The first satirical statue, installed last Thursday also in Washington, depicts a bronze pile of feces on Nancy Pelosi’s desk and references the January 6 attack. After Trump supporters marched on the Capitol that day, some broke into the building, attempting to overturn the 2020 election.

“This memorial honors the brave men and women who broke into the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021 to loot, urinate and defecate throughout those hallowed halls in order to overturn an election,” the statue read.

Although it is unknown who is behind the four statues, the Washington Post reported that the National Park Service approved a request by Julia Jimenez-Pyzik to install the poop monument on the National Mall. On Tuesday, an anonymous person called the Washington Post to say he and others were behind the tiki torch and poop installations. On Wednesday, the same person called back, claiming they also were responsible for the Philadelphia and Portland statues.

“We are hoping they spark conversation about what we view are certain political issues that are relevant to voters and how they make their decision voting,” the anonymous caller told the Post.

UK farms worth more than £1 million will no longer be exempt from paying inheritance tax, Rachel Reeves has announced in her autumn budget.

For combined business and agricultural assets above £1 million, there will be a 50% inheritance tax relief, at an effective rate of 20%, from April 2026.

We would like to hear from UK farmers about their views on the changes. How might you be affected? Do you have any concerns?

The former Republican governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger has announced that he is backing Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris in next week’s election.

In a long post on X, Schwarzenegger, 77, said that while he doesn’t “really do endorsements” … “hate[s] politics” and doesn’t “trust most politicians”, he felt compelled to formally endorse Harris and her pick for vice president Tim Walz.

“I will always be an American before I am a Republican,” he wrote. “That’s why, this week, I am voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. I’m sharing it with all of you because I think there are a lot of you who feel like I do. You don’t recognise our country. And you are right to be furious.”

Schwarzenegger, who quit acting between 2003 and 2011 while he served in California, continued by writing that he was disappointed in all those who have been in power in the US over the past decades who have discussed addressing the national debt and “our broken immigration system” yet not managing to do so. This continued during election campaigning, he said, as politicians prefer “having talking points” for elections rather than performing “the public service that will make Americans’ lives better.”

“It is a just game to them. But it is life for my fellow Americans. We should be pissed,” Schwarzenegger wrote. “But a candidate who won’t respect your vote unless it is for him, a candidate who will send his followers to storm the Capitol while he watches with a Diet Coke, a candidate who has shown no ability to work to pass any policy besides a tax cut that helped his donors and other rich people like me but helped no one else else, a candidate who thinks Americans who disagree with him are the bigger enemies than China, Russia, or North Korea – that won’t solve our problems.”

Schwarzenegger, who replaced Donald Trump as host of The New Celebrity Apprentice in 2016, has long been an outspoken critic of the former president and current Republican candidate. Schwarzenegger likened the 6 January attack on the Capitol to the Kristallnacht in Nazi Germany and described Trump as “a failed leader. He will go down in history as the worst president ever.”

He returned to the aftermath of the 2020 election on X, saying that “rejecting the results of an election is as un-American as it gets. To someone like me who talks to people all over the world and still knows America is the shining city on a hill, calling America [a] trash can for the world is so unpatriotic, it makes me furious.”

Were Trump to be re-elected, he said, “it will just be four more years of bullshit with no results that makes us angrier and angrier, more divided, and more hateful. We need to close the door on this chapter of American history, and I know that former President Trump won’t do that.”

“I want to move forward as a country,” he concluded, “and even though I have plenty of disagreements with their platform, I think the only way to do that is with Harris and Walz.”

It all seemed like an innocent bit of fun. In the early 2000s, Russ McKamey and his then wife Carol went on TV to explain that they were spending $30,000 to make Halloween at their home bigger and better than anyone else’s. Fans queued around the block of the quiet San Diego suburb to experience fake blood, spooky props and teenage actors giving them jump scares. Until, that is, things got much, much darker.

By 2012, participants were being waterboarded, chained up in boxes and almost buried alive after McKamey decided to make McKamey Manor a more extreme, kid-free zone. “I was seeing people come out shaking uncontrollably … one guy, it looked like his nose was broken; another burst a blood vessel in his eye – it was full of blood,” says Mercedes Ann, a certified lifeguard with basic first aid training who was there to deal with the fallout. “People would have psychotic breakdowns – that’s the only time they would stop the tour. Then they would bring me in to calm them down.” She was 15.

“We didn’t get paid or anything,” explains Ann, who began volunteering at the manor, aged 13, after meeting McKamey at a community barbecue – back when “Russ and Carol were like the cool aunt and uncle”. Over the following years, McKamey would not take a single payment for entering the manor; instead, participants were required to bring dog food to give to charity.

It’s a story I found myself immersed in recently, when I created the podcast series Inside McKamey Manor. Everyone I spoke to seemed to have an eye-opening tale, all of which seemed too wild to be true. Although when we put a detailed list of them all to McKamey, he chose not to comment.

As news of this extreme haunt spread via TV appearances and shows such as Dark Tourist on Netflix, demand grew high. According to McKamey, the manor had a 24,000-person waiting list and there was a $20,000 reward for anyone able to complete it (no one ever has). Participants were required to sign a waiver up to 40 pages long, stating you could be subjected to “drowning, electric shocks and exposure to poisonous animals”, be “slapped, shoved and restrained” and that it may result in “broken bones, dislocation of limbs, crushed limbs and blackouts”.

If no one was getting paid, why were people agreeing to volunteer? Kris Smith saw McKamey on the 2017 documentary Haunters: The Art of the Scare. They became friends after Smith got in touch, offering to help McKamey with some graphic design work. They began speaking on the phone every day and formed a friendship. As Smith says: “[McKamey] was a goof. I didn’t really take him seriously.” But, in 2018, Smith, who had already gone through the manor once and coped, decided to go through a second time.

“He gave me threats of being buried alive … I got lowered into a well 10 ft in the ground.” He was made to unlock padlocks via combination codes while water was filling the well. “I tell him I’m done for the night, I’m tired,” Smith says, but McKamey persuaded him to do one more thing. Smith says he ended up being dragged in a metal trough behind a truck. “Russ had told me: ‘I’m always gonna know when to stop, don’t worry about it’”. While in the trough, Smith says, “[McKamey] started shovelling dirt on me over and over again … I start waving my hand while saying I quit.” But Smith says McKamey didn’t stop immediately, that in fact he would continue a tour as long as he’s “having fun”. Their friendship soon broke down.

McKamey seemed to have a network of people like Smith willing to help him for nothing. But 2019 marked the beginning of a shift. There were growing concerns across social media about the manor, especially on Reddit. Debates cropped up as to whether McKamey was running a “red room” – livestreaming videos of people being abused or tortured to sell on the dark web. An online petition titled “Shut down McKamey Manor” received 192,744 signatures. Since then, there have been eight petitions to do just that. Smith is part of the global movement to close the manor.

McKamey was no stranger to documenting his life and posting it online. In 2009, he launched his YouTube channel, McKamey Manor Presents. By 2019, the things his participants had to endure were brandished across the internet as part of the deal of signing up. In one video, a man has his eyes duct taped and is seemingly covered in oil and a blood-like substance. An “actor” is shaving his head and holding a hammer over his teeth, threatening to smash them. In another, the same man appears to have blood pouring from his mouth while he lays unconscious on the ground.

Gabriella Hardiman, 19, was one of those whose video was posted on the YouTube page. “I felt a little weird with the camera,” she admits. Having seen McKamey on TV, she figured that most of the controversial acts were part of the theatre. She signed up via the manor’s official Facebook group and quickly received a call that “there’s a cancellation, you have to come tomorrow, this is the only chance”. Hardiman was chained inside a freezer box, had a tarantula put on her face, and had a panic attack mid-experience.

“I remember being in a straitjacket lying in water [and] having it poured over my face,” she recalls. “Someone called the cops because we were outside screaming.” The manor had so many problems in the community that the haunt ended up moving to Tennessee in 2017. “I posted a video against him in 2017,” says Hardiman. “It was on YouTube for two days before I took it down, because the hate I was getting from Russ and the community was so insane. It’s why I waited so long to talk about it, and why in every interview my voice is shaking because I’m so scared how people are going to perceive it.” She feels shame about speaking out, because she signed a waiver consenting to take part.

What makes the waiver even more controversial is that it may not even legally stand up. “I’ve read a lot of contracts over the past 20 years; I’ve never seen anything like this,” says Thomas Greer, a lawyer from Tennessee. While determining whether every detail in people’s experiences was legal is extremely complicated, Greer is clear on one thing: was it legal for 13-year-old Mercedes Ann to sign a contract? “No, that’s not legal,” he says.

By 2023, complaints about the manor were too prominent to ignore. Hulu released a documentary Monster Inside: America’s Most Extreme Haunted House, presenting first-hand accounts of the manor and the trauma participants had experienced. McKamey filed a lawsuit alleging invasion of privacy. In October 2023, YouTuber Reckless Ben made it his mission to complete the manor, only to discover that McKamey was now only operating a physical bootcamp in his front garden instead. After hearing testimonies from participants, Ben Schneider went viral trying to shut down the manor. He was regularly posting exposés of McKamey’s behaviour, passing on footage ex-employees had given him to the police.

Unrelated to the manor, a personal altercation led to McKamey’s arrest in July 2024 for domestic violence and the attempted murder and rape of an ex-girlfriend. In September, the charges against him were dropped. If the Facebook post on the group Keep McKamey Manor Open is anything to go by, there are still fans of McKamey, despite the controversy. “Does anyone know how to get signed up for the McKamey Manor?” a fan asked in early October. “I want a shot at the challenge.” The manor’s closure, it seems, is still very much up for debate.

Rachel Reeves says the UK voted for change, and the Labour government has a mandate for a decade of “national renewal”.

Reeves pledges “more pounds in people’s pockets” and improved living standards. The only way to drive economic growth is to “invest, invest, invest”, she adds.

The government must “restore economic stability and turn the page on 14 years” of Conservative government, Reeves says. She says the Labour party has rebuilt the UK economy before, and will “rebuild Britain once again”.

Reeves says this budget will raise taxes by £40bn.

She adds that she is “deeply proud to be Britain’s first ever female chancellor of the exchequer’.

Peter Walker, senior political correspondent: Reeves sets out the political challenge – and the very big one – at the centre of her budget, and indeed the whole government: making people feel they are better off, and with better public services. And this requires investment, she says, adding some inevitable Tory-bashing for good measure, plus noting her status as the first-ever female chancellor.

National insurance

• Employees will not pay more directly, Reeves says. However, she will raise employers’ national insurance contributions by 1.2 percentage points to 15% from April.

• The government will also reduce a secondary threshold when contributions are due from £9,100 to £5,000.

• Those measures will raise £25bn a year by the end of the forecast period.

• Before the budget, employers were liable for a rate of 13.8% of workers’ earnings above £175 a week. An increase of one percentage point would raise an estimated £8.5bn.

PW: This is the big fiscal hitter of the budget – £25bn a year by the end of the parliament – and probably the most politically perilous choice Reeves will make. There is no doubt that public services need the extra money, and voters want better public services. But it will be portrayed as tax on jobs, and as something that could hit growth, even with the new allowances for smaller businesses.

Income tax

PW: If not a fully fledged rabbit yanked from a hat, then we do perhaps have a glimpse of a nose and some whiskers. The surprise move allows Reeves to argue she has kept Labour’s manifesto promise to not increase taxes on working people – even if it does only start in 2028/29.

Capital gains and inheritance tax

• Capital gains tax will be increased. The lower rate will be raised from 10% to 18%, while the higher rate will rise from 20% to 24%. However, there will be no increase on the 24% capital gains rate imposed on second properties.

• The government will extend a freeze on the threshold for inheritance tax, allowing £325,000 to be inherited tax free.

• There will be tax raises worth £2bn from reforming reliefs for business and agricultural assets. After £1m, those assets will attract inheritance tax of 20%.

PW: A rise in capital gains tax was very much baked in with budget expectations, and the increases are not huge – as Reeves says, they will keep UK rates relatively low by international standards. And it will raise a relatively modest £2.5bn by the end of the parliament. On inheritance tax, she has largely closed loopholes connected to farms, but even this and other tweaks will raise an eventual £2bn a year. None of this is likely to be hugely contentious.

The minimum wage

• Reeves confirms that the “national living wage”, the legal minimum for over-21s, will increase by 6.7% to £12.21, equivalent to £1,400 a year for an eligible full-time worker.

• There will be a single adult rate phased in over time to eventually equalise pay for under-21s.

PW: The most recent of dozens of announcements to be briefed in advance of the budget. Paying people more is usually seen as a vote-winner – but ministers will also be wary of business voices warning about the impact this could have on job creation.

Tobacco and alcohol

• The government will implement a levy on vapes, which will be increased in line with tobacco.

• Tobacco taxes will rise by 2% above retail prices index (RPI) measure of inflation for the rest of this parliament, and tax on hand-rolling tobacco will increase by 10%.

• Taxes on alcohol will rise in line with the RPI. However, Reeves announces a cut in draught duty by 1.7%, which she says is a penny off a pint in the pub.

PW: On what we are obliged to call sin taxes, Reeves has, as expected, further taxed tobacco and vapes. In another sign of how this government is less worried about what might be termed nanny state measures, it is also toughening the levy on sugary soft drinks. As a sop to the tabloid, she did cut 1p off the duty of a pint of draught beer.

Fuel duty

• Reeves says increasing fuel duty next year would be the “wrong choice”, so she extends the freeze for a year and maintains the last government’s 5p cut.

• Fuel duty was frozen between 2011 and 2022, and cut by 5p in March 2022 after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

PW: A continued freeze to fuel duty was one of the most politically tricky decisions faced by Reeves. On the one hand, as she said, the £3bn cost is a lot. But the anti-fuel duty rise lobby is very powerful, and increasing it could (and would) be portrayed as a tax rise for working people.

Private school fees

PW: Not in the least a surprise, and if you believe the polling, one of the more popular policies in both the Labour manifesto and in this budget. Will it see a rush of private school students into the state sector? Time will tell, but ministers are fairly relaxed.

Schools and education

• Reeves says the Department for Education will receive £6.7bn, a 19% real-terms increase. That includes £1.4bn to rebuild schools in the greatest need.

• The schools budget will increase by £2.3bn to support the hiring of teachers.

• There will be £2.1bn for school maintenance, a £300m increase.

• Reeves announces a £1bn uplift in funding for special needs.

• There will be another £300m for higher education.

PW: One of the most visible and enduring legacies of the last Labour government was the many new and renovated schools it delivered. Reeves has set out her ambition to copy this – the 19% real-terms increase in investment is an instant lesson on what you can do with the changed fiscal rules.

NHS

• Reeves promises a 10-year plan for the NHS in the spring, targeting 2% productivity growth next year.

• She announces a £22.6bn increase in the day-to-day health budget, and £3.1bn increase in the capital budget. That includes £1bn for repairs and upgrades and £1.5bn for new beds in hospitals and testing capacity.

PW: At risk of endlessly repeating a theme, the state of the NHS is one of the biggest factors on which Labour won the election, and on which it will be judged five years later. Will a £22.6bn increase in everyday spending be enough? Not without parallel structural changes. But it’s fair to say that without it, waiting lists would surely rise again. And the voters would notice.

Housing

• The government will spend £5bn on housing, including increasing the supply of affordable housing.

• The government will reduce right-to-buy discounts, and local governments will retain the earnings from council housing sales to allow them to reinvest.

• The government will hire “hundreds of new planning officers” to accelerate housebuilding.

PW: All the figures and new policies on housing were briefed in advance, and for good political reason. One of the key metrics the Starmer government has set itself is to build 1.5m new homes – and the voters are watching.

Transport

• Reeves commits to the Transpennine Route Upgrade, improving capacity at Manchester Victoria, and electrifying the Wigan to Bolton route. She also promises to support east-west rail link between Oxford and Cambridge.

• Reeves confirms the government will fund tunnelling of HS2 to London Euston.

• There will be a £500m increase in the roads budget next year to target potholes.

PW: No, it’s not full HS2, but the ragbag of mainly northern rail routes, and confirmation that the Manchester-London route will end in Euston are something. And as every councillor will tell you, at length, voters are very, very interested in potholes.

Energy

• Reeves announces £3.4bn for the warm homes plan to upgrade buildings, lowering energy bills.

• The government will fund Great British Energy, a new body to be based in Aberdeen.

Public spending

Defence

Local government

• There will be £1.3bn for additional grant funding for local government, including £600m for social care.

• Greater Manchester and the West Midlands will get integrated settlements next year, allowing them to take more control of their spending.

PW: This is something for a part of public life which bore the brunt of austerity, and the section often most keenly felt by voters. Is it enough? Of course not. But is it a start? Yes.

Public investment

• Reeves says more public investment is needed in the UK. A new rule will target debt falling as a share of the economy. She confirms that debt will be measured as public sector net financial liabilities, recognising benefits from investments.

• The rule will apply in 2029-30, and then net financial debt will fall by the third year of every forecast.

• There will be regular reports on government investments from the OBR.

• She says the government will invest £1bn in aerospace, £2bn in automotive to support electric vehicles, and £500m for life sciences.

• Reeves adds the government will invest £6.1bn in funding in sectors such as engineering, biotechnology and medical science.

PW: Politically, albeit most likely in the longer term, this could be the most significant change in the budget. To very obviously make the link between low investment and the state of public services, Reeves lists the problems of crumbling infrastructure in various sectors to a series of cries of “Shame!” from Labour MPs.

Planes and private jets

• Air passenger duty will increase by up to £2 for each economy short-haul flight, Reeves says.

• Private jets will attract an extra 50% air passenger duty, up to £450 per passenger for a flight.

PW: This is both a largely politically-risk free change, and one which allowed the chancellor to make a few well-aimed jokes in the direction of Rishi Sunak, saying the levy would be applied on flights going to “say … California?”. It wins plenty of laughs.

Business taxes and non-doms

• The government will introduce permanently lower business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses from 2026-27. Until then they will receive 40% relief on business rates up to a cap of £110,000.

• Employment allowance will be increased from £5000 to £10,500, reducing national insurance for smaller businesses.

• Taxes on carried interest, generally paid by private equity managers, will rise from 28% to 32% from April.

• Reeves confirms the oil profits levy will be increased to 38%, and extended.

• The concept of non-domicile residents will be abolished from April.

Compensation schemes

PW: Even Tory MPs will find it hard to argue with this. And Reeves’s words that the last government apologised for the infected blood scandal but failed to budget at all for compensation payments is a powerful argument.

Other measures

OBR

• Reeves says Labour inherited a £22bn “black hole” with allegedly unfunded pledges by the Conservative government.

• The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government’s budget watchdog, has published a review saying that the previous government did not disclose details of spending. Those details would have made forecasts “materially different”, Reeves says.

• Reeves says the government will implement 10 recommendations from the OBR’s review.

PW: This is very nakedly partisan and in some ways familiar, not least the idea of the £22bn fiscal black hole. But the idea of the OBR saying it was effectively misled by the Conservatives is very strong political cover for the coming tax rises in limited increases to public budgets. It will enrage Jeremy Hunt, the shadow chancellor, all the more.

Inflation and growth forecasts

• The chancellor will maintain the Bank of England’s 2% target for inflation.

• Inflation will average 2.5% in 2024, rising to 2.6% in 2025, before gradually dropping to 2% in 2029, according to OBR forecasts. Inflation was at 1.7% in September, below the Bank of England’s 2% target, and down from 11% in October 2022.

• The OBR slightly upgrades its growth forecast for this year, but adjusts them down in later years. GDP growth is forecast to be 1.1% in 2024, then 2%, 1.8%, 1.5%, 1.5%, and 1.6% in 2030, Reeves says. At the spring budget under the then Conservative chancellor Jeremy Hunt the OBR had forecast 0.8% growth this year, 1.9% in 2025, and 2% in 2026.

PW: The OBR’s inflation and growth predictions are hardly stellar, with inflation not due to fall down to the 2% target before 2029. But in truth, as long as it stays in the 2% range, Reeves would take it. She will, however, very much hope that the growth figures – the stated central task of the Keir Starmer government – pick up.

Government borrowing

• Reeves announces new rules to not borrow for day-to-day spending. The current budget will be balanced within three years of forecasts.

• The government will run a deficit of £26.2bn in 2026, but will achieve a surplus of £10.9bn in 2027-28, £9.3bn in 2028-29 and £9.9bn in 2029-30.

• Public sector net debt will fall from £127bn in 2024-25, falling gradually to £70.6bn by 2029-20.

PW: Expect the forecasts of reduced borrowing and an eventual surplus to be much mentioned by ministers in the coming days and weeks, as they try to push back against the Conservatives’ charges of fiscal incompetence. The tougher rules on day-to-day spending will be seen as a balance to the relaxation of their equivalent on investment, as already announced.

• Reeves says it is a moment of “fundamental choice” for the UK.

• She says the government will protect the NHS, protect working people and “rebuild Britain”.

• She says the Conservatives must say what choices they would make if they disagree with her decisions. They would have to cut schools and hospitals if they disagree with any tax increases.

PW: Reeves’s final words are an open challenge to the Conservatives – and an attempt to pre-empt their accusations of broken promises: ‘what would you do instead?” It is a fair question, even if as an opposition you sometimes get a free pass on such scrutiny.