On December 12, 2025, the UK Parliament’s Treasury Committee launched a sweeping inquiry into the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), marking the watchdog’s 15th anniversary with a deep dive into its track record, influence, and future role in the country’s fiscal framework. The move comes at a pivotal moment for the OBR, which has been under heightened scrutiny following a series of controversies and leadership changes, and amid growing debate over its independence and effectiveness.
The OBR, created in 2010 by then-Chancellor George Osborne during the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, was established to provide independent analysis of the UK’s public finances. Its mission: to offer unbiased economic and fiscal forecasts, serving as a bulwark against political spin and short-termism in budgetary policy. But fifteen years on, the OBR finds itself at the center of a storm, its impartiality and accuracy questioned by both politicians and economists.
According to the House of Commons, the new inquiry will examine the OBR’s historic performance, focusing specifically on the accuracy of its economic and fiscal forecasts and its independence from government influence. MPs are seeking evidence from stakeholders and experts, hoping to learn not just from the OBR’s successes, but also from its missteps—and to consider whether reforms to its role, remit, or working relationship with HM Treasury are needed to ensure it continues to foster positive economic outcomes for the UK.
Dame Meg Hillier, Chair of the Treasury Committee, set the tone for the inquiry by acknowledging both the OBR’s importance and the criticisms it faces. “The OBR is an important part of the UK’s fiscal framework. But it is often castigated by frustrated economists who feel they should be in charge because they shout the loudest. And we need only remember Liz Truss’ mini-budget to remind ourselves of what happens when the OBR is sidelined,” Hillier said, referencing the market turmoil that followed the former Prime Minister’s decision to bypass the OBR’s scrutiny in 2022.
Hillier was quick to clarify the committee’s intentions: “This inquiry is not a stick to beat the OBR with. What my Committee intends to do is have an honest conversation about what the watchdog does well and where it needs to do better. I hope this will provide a useful foundation for the new Chair when they are appointed.”
The timing of the inquiry is notable. Just last week, Richard Hughes, the OBR’s former chairman, resigned following a damaging leak of sensitive economic forecasts ahead of the Budget. The early release of Rachel Reeves’s Budget policies on the OBR’s website—45 minutes before the Chancellor’s Commons speech—was described by Hughes as the “worst failure” in the watchdog’s history, according to The Telegraph. In his resignation letter to Reeves, Hillier, and other officials, Hughes wrote that he needed to “play my part in enabling the organisation that I have loved leading for the past five years to quickly move on from this regrettable incident.”
This was not the only controversy to engulf the OBR in recent months. The agency has also been embroiled in a public spat with Treasury officials over government briefings about the state of the nation’s finances. David Miles, a member of the OBR’s Budget Responsibility Committee, told MPs that leaks from within the Treasury had wrongly suggested the watchdog’s forecasts were fluctuating wildly, further muddying the waters for policymakers and the public alike.
Sir Robert Chote, a former chairman of the OBR, weighed in on the debate, criticizing what he called “heavy briefing” from the Treasury in the lead-up to the Budget. He told the Lords’ economic affairs committee that “a good, effective working relationship” between the OBR and Treasury is vital—implying that such a relationship may be fraying at the edges today.
Meanwhile, the OBR’s productivity forecasts—often seen as a bellwether for the UK’s long-term economic prospects—have drawn fire from both economists and politicians. Many claim the OBR’s outlook for productivity growth has been too optimistic, raising questions about the reliability of its projections and their influence on government policy. According to Upworthy, the Treasury Committee will examine the OBR’s forecasting record in detail, seeking to identify areas where the agency “needs to do better.”
The controversy has spilled over into the political arena as well. Chancellor Rachel Reeves recently faced criticism for warning that she might have to break Labour’s manifesto promises on tax due to the dire state of public finances—a warning that drew sharp responses from both government and opposition benches. However, a letter published by the OBR showed that Reeves had been told her fiscal headroom was £4 billion, only a little down from the £10 billion available in the spring, suggesting that the situation may not be as bleak as some had feared.
Despite the turbulence, the OBR has welcomed the new inquiry. A spokesman for the watchdog told the press, “We welcome the inquiry and look forward to engaging with the committee.” The hope among many in Westminster is that the investigation will not only address recent failings but also reinforce the OBR’s role as an impartial guardian of the nation’s finances.
The OBR’s creation in 2010 was hailed as a significant step toward greater fiscal transparency and discipline. By placing independent experts in charge of economic forecasting, the government sought to reassure markets and voters alike that the UK’s public finances were in safe hands. But as the events of recent weeks have shown, even the most robust institutions can falter—especially when trust and communication break down between key players.
As the Treasury Committee’s inquiry gets underway, it faces a daunting set of questions: How can the OBR regain public and political confidence after a damaging leak and leadership turmoil? Are its forecasting models fit for purpose in an era of economic uncertainty? And what, if anything, must change in its relationship with the Treasury to ensure that the watchdog remains both independent and effective?
Stakeholders from across the political and economic spectrum are expected to weigh in. Some will likely call for tighter controls and more transparency, while others may urge greater flexibility or a broader remit for the OBR. What’s clear is that the outcome of this inquiry will have far-reaching implications—not just for the OBR itself, but for the way the UK manages its public finances in the years ahead.
With the OBR at a crossroads, the coming months will reveal whether the watchdog can emerge stronger from this period of scrutiny, or whether deeper reforms are needed to restore faith in the UK’s fiscal framework. For now, all eyes are on the Treasury Committee as it begins its work—one honest conversation at a time.
