Stories abound on the fact that the UK supposedly has state debt of £1 trillion for the first time. This however is not true.
Over the last few years the UK has issued debt as shown below totalling about £560 billion. I have based all my data on the national accounts for the third quarter of 2011 unless otherwise noted. It's the borrowing since 2008 that has supposedly given rise to the debt of £1 trillion.
| UK net borrowings | ||||||
| Annually per UK government accounts, table A51 | ||||||
| Year | Net borrowing | QE | Net | |||
| £bn | £bn | £bn | ||||
| 2005 | 35,736 | - | 35,736 | |||
| 2006 | 35,543 | - | 35,543 | |||
| 2007 | 37,182 | - | 37,182 | |||
| 2008 | 66,368 | - | 66,368 | |||
| 2009 | 147,878 | 200,000 | -52,122 | |||
| 2010 | 147,686 | - | 147,686 | |||
| 2011 (to Q3) | 89,571 | 75,000 | 14,571 | |||
| Average (6.75 yrs) | 42,216 | |||||
| Average borrowing as a proprtion of current GDP | 2.91% | |||||
However, it should be noted that the government has done something else at least as significant. Through the quantitative easing programme the Bank of England has repurchased or will be soon repurchasing near enough £275 billion of that debt (I've shown the last £75 billion as happening in Q3 of 2011 as that's near enough when it was authorised).
Now the Bank of England is owned by the UK government so if, in accounting terms, a consolidated set of accounts were to be prepared the £275bn owed by the Treasury to the Bank of England would simply be crossed out, or ignored. The actual debt would only be £725 billion.
And in this case that would be absolutely the right point of view. There is no hope at all that this debt will ever be sold back into the markets: there's enough new debt to sell to meet all market demand for UK debt without ever re-selling this stuff. So it's absolutely right to say this debt does not exist and should not therefore be in the statistics at all because for all practical purposes it has already been written off. And as important, the interest paid on that £275 billion should not be considered government spending justifying cuts either: that interest is paid straight back to the government.
Then note what this does to the narrative on average borrowing. OK, this data misses quarter 4 of 2011 as the information is not yet available, but over 6.75 years the average borrowing is near enough just over £42 billion and that's a remarkably consistent sum over time and is only 3% or so of current GDP; and that's within the Maastricht limits, let it be noted.
Nor is there any hint now of this QE causing inflation, all of which can safely be said to have had other causes, not least because as Government accounts also show, the M3 measure of money supply has fallen steadily since 2009, meaning there is no prospect of inflation in the future either as a consequence of this process.
So we have no debt crisis. We just have misinformation about how big the debt is and about how much we're borrowing. Tell the truth, as I have here, and you get a very different picture indeed. And that would also lead to very different economic policies too. Because tell this story and the focus need not be on cuts that we do not need but on growth that we do need. False accounting is forcing the national political agenda in a direction in which it need not go.
It's all a matter of getting the story right and on this occasion it takes an accountant to do that.
So shall we stop all the other nonsense, now and get on with the real issue, which is we have low net borrowing that we can afford, lower interest costs than the government claims and the basis for sustainable recovery already in place. All we need to do is grab the opportunity.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Nicely put Richard, but how do we get the financial markets – and the ratings agencies for that matter – to act on the basis of this accurate reading of the situation, instead of the invented one pedalled by the government (and the opposition)? Not only does the idea of a debt crisis suit Tory cuts ideology, it also suits the interests of the wealthy elite.
I’ve sent the message far and wide
No idea of anyone will bite…
Please put on FaceBook.
The Tories have had all manner of nasties planned for years, see here. The deficit is just the excuse they’re using, coupled with the general economic ignorance of just about everyone, to bring them in. Given their primary aims are to destroy the welfare services and the NHS and replace them with private models, robbing the public purse meanwhile, it isn’t in their interests to boost the economy. The worse things are, the more they can continue with their ‘tough choices’ narrative and use it to excuse the damage they’re doing. If the economy wasn’t broken, they’d have to break it to get their *real* job done, is what I’m saying.
Apparently the recent IMF report is suggesting the UK indulge in fiscal stimulus – a report I got from the BBC, of all places. Getting the BBC to cover this crisis properly is something of a ‘blood out of a stone’ project. Perhaps times, they are a-changin’.
You’ve certainly called their bluff here, Richard. It wil be interesting to see what sort of response, if any, is forthcoming.
I agree entirely with Mark and Bill: the so-called debt crisis suits the Tories down to the ground. From the outset it’s been cover for their version of the ‘shock doctrine’. Strategically they’ll maintain this myth until about a year before the next election so they can carry on robbing and wrecking, and then all of a sudden discover that – as Richard demonstrates here – things aren’t as bad as they thought, because their policies have worked, obviously, and fight the election on that ticket.
To stop that happening the two Eds need to get their heads around Richard’s message ASAP and develop their arguments and polcies accordingly. I live in hope!