Member News
There's not a single person who knows me who was not aware I was only doing this for the emergency Budget
Sir Alan Budd
The departing head of the new Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR) has rejected suggestions he resigned due to differences with George Osborne.
Appearing before the Commons Treasury committee this morning, Sir Alan Budd insisted that he was not leaving because of any disagreement between himself and the chancellor
"I am simply leaving when I had completed the task I had been set," he said.
"I made it clear to chancellor I had only taken on this job for the emergency Budget and for any work associated with it".
He added: "The chancellor knew I had a three month contract, as did my colleagues".
Sir Alan was appointed the chair of the independent economic forecasting body when it was created by Osborne soon after the Coalition took power.
But his announcement that he would be stepping down so soon after his appointment led to speculation that he had fallen out with the chancellor.
In advance of this morning's evidence session, Sir Alan had issued his own recommendations about how the OBR could be seen to be more independent of government.
He suggested that the body be housed outside of the Treasury, and report to Parliament as well as the chancellor.
Appearing in front of MPs this morning, Sir Alan said his "main ambition" after leaving his post on August 13 was to return to "semi-retirement", but he acknowledged he also held three part-time consultancy positions which he would return to "in due course".
He told the new chairman of the committee, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, that there was no conflict of interest with him returning to consultancy work having served in such a high profile and sensitive public role.
"I think at the moment I have no access to market sensitive information at all," he said. "Everything I did know came out with the Budget".
But Labour MP Chuka Umma told Sir Alan that the impression had been given upon his appointment that he would serve for much longer than three months.
"Why was it not mentioned you were going to be in position for three months," he asked. "If you look at announcements that were made when you were appointed, the impression was very much given you were going to be there for some time".
And the Streatham MP asked Sir Alan to clear up speculation that his departure was down to a "big disagreement" between him and the chancellor.
Sir Alan insisted that the terms of his contract had been available to anyone who wished to see them and he said he regretted any "misunderstanding".
"There's not a single person who knows me who was not aware I was only doing this for the emergency Budget," he said.
Sir Alan was also pressed by the committee on why the OBR had published revised employment figures moments before prime minister's questions on June 30, uncertainty over which dominated that week's clash between David Cameron and Harriet Harman.
Tyrie noted that the OBR had published figures today at 9.30am which he said seemed a "reasonable and sensible time" for material to be published. "Why did you pick on 11am for these OBR figures?" he asked.
But Sir Alan said there was "nothing sinister" about the timing of the release. He said it was simply down to when he arrived for work that morning and that no figures could be published without his approval.
"I normally arrive at the office very early in the morning and sometimes have to ring the bell," he said.
"However on that particular day for personal reasons I was unable to reach the office until 10.30am".
And he told the committee he was "taken aback" by the reaction to the publication of the figures. "In taking our decision it was not at all part of my decision, or our decision, there was prime minister's questions that day," he said.
Earlier in the session Sir Alan defended the decision to publish the figures on the Wednesday rather than the following day as had initially been planned.
"The decision to bring forward by one day was completely ours, we did it because a Treasury document with misleading numbers had been leaked and was giving rise to misinformed comment."
"We thought it correct to release numbers which correctly represented the OBR's forecast.
"In retrospect I wish we had provided more information and a specific warning against using numbers to estimate budget effects," he added.
During the tricky evidence session, Labour MP Andy Love told Sir Alan he had been "naive with the way the whole debacle had been handled".
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.