This is a news story, published by Guardian, that relates primarily to Home Office news.
For more United kingdom business & economics news, you can click here:
more United kingdom business & economics newsFor more news from Guardian, you can click here:
more news from GuardianOtherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best business news, entertainment news, world news, and much more. If you like this article about United kingdom business & economics, you might also like this article about
Fiscal Studies. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest Home Office spending news, illegal immigration spending news, news about United kingdom business & economics, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
public financesGuardian
•
69% Informative
Institute for Fiscal Studies says Home Office repeatedly lowballed its budget estimates.
Ministers knew budgets it submitted were insufficient and habitually drew on Treasury reserves.
Labour said it was proof the previous government had “covered up’ the extent of the crisis in the asylum system and that ministers “ran away from the problem”.
Home Office and Treasury have budgeted for asylum costs leaves a lot to be desired.
A Labour source said: The sheer scale of the Tories ’ utter incompetence at governing is a total farce’ But a Conservative source hit back and said the government had not set out any plans to reduce the costs.
VR Score
73
Informative language
71
Neutral language
55
Article tone
semi-formal
Language
English
Language complexity
58
Offensive language
possibly offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
short-lived
External references
1
Source diversity
1
Affiliate links
no affiliate links