A distinguished group of economists has written to the Financial Times advising against further spending cuts and any return to austerity: https://www.ft.com/content/4b0d4ec3-cfb8-44fa-93a6-4474866dc917
They advise that further taxation is going to be necessary, but beyond stating that it should fall 'on the broadest shoulders' do not specify where it might come from.
Meanwhile a discussion on BlueSky showed Labour supporters disillusioned with what they saw as a Labour government offering more effective implementation of Tory policies.
Some argue that the fiscal rules should be abandoned, referring to what has happened in Germany. However, that country's ratio of debt to GDP is in the low sixties in percentage terms whereas in the UK it is not far short of 100 per cent. Abandoning the fiscal rules would certainly force up the cost of government borrowing.
The cost of benefits has risen by something like 40 per cent in real terms since 2013 and is projected to rise further despite recent policy changes: harsh on the most vulnerable or tinkering at the edges, depending on your perspective.
Labour has to exert some fiscal discipline, otherwise the cost of the welfare state will become unsustainable. Clearly many of those unable to work need more systematic support to enable them to do so.
The left's answer is a wealth tax but the Government has no mandate for that, it would deter investment in the UK and the really wealthy would find ways of evading it.
Personally I would have increased fuel duty, a small increase would have yielded significant revenue and would have been bearable. I would also have reversed Jeremy Hunt's unfunded cuts in employees national insurance, but Labour boxed itself in before the election.
Labour faces some difficult choices, but a large majority means rebellions will be embarrassing rather than fatal.
No comments:
Post a Comment