According to the FT Sajid Javid is announcing that today that the Budget will be on March 11. As they note, a focus will be on delivering on the promise to the North:
The Financial Times understands Treasury officials have been instructed to view all Budget measures through the lens of improving economic performance in parts of the UK far from the more prosperous south-east of England.
The Tories seized seats off Labour at the election in the north, the Midlands and Wales, many in so-called left-behind areas.
To achieve this they note:
The Budget money stems from the Conservatives' pledge to raise net capital spending from about 2 per cent of gross domestic product to 3 per cent, giving the chancellor some £100bn for investment over five years.
Of this war chest, the chancellor has about £80bn to allocate to projects over the next few years.
So, the Tories are going to deliver maybe £20 billion a year for investment when the expected minimum requirement for a Green New Deal is £100 bn a year for a decade. In other words, they are planning to fail to deliver the green transformation this country requires.
And worryingly, the FT notes:
But outside of infrastructure spending, most of the money needed to boost underperforming regions will need to be raised from additional tax revenues because Mr Javid faces tight public finances.
Having already announced a loosening of his fiscal rules to take advantage of low interest rates for more investment, the Conservatives' manifesto promised to balance the current budget – so that tax revenues exceed day-to-day public spending – within three years.
In other words, a wholly inadequate infrastructure programme that is unlikely to be that green apart, the Tories are planning to continue with austerity, whatever the consequences for well being.
And given that no serious commentator thinks that there will be any significant growth at all in the UK in the coming year, and that Brexit harms any prospect of it, imposing such a constraint now means that any chance of a fiscal stimulus - of exactly the sort that even the FT is now calling for - is now extremely small indeed.
In other words, Sajid Javid is planning to set out to fail the country.
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:
Did you expect him to have had a Pauline conversion? He’s a dyed-in-the-wool, economically illliterate, neo-liberal, small-state, libertarian Tory …. the new rulers of our nation. And they have a cunning plan which is to be as fiscally pro-active as is minimally needed in order to stay in power for the rest of eternity. While they may have conned a sufficient number of voters to hold on to the reins of government, reality will eventually overtake them. It always does. In the meantime – you got it – more austerity, but with extra sugar to help the medicine go down.
Labour said they would aim to balance the books on day to day spending within 5 years.
Tories said they’d do it in 3.
Tory wins the argument, and the election.
I’ll say it again, Labours advisers are/were the most dangerous people . Because of their pigheaded, arrogant and steadfast devotion to neoliberalism, they refused point blank in adopting the MMT line, even going so far as publishing blogs how MMT, and its supporters, are wrong.
Tories will be Tories. They do what they do, shrink the state, and shit on the poor. I can’t blame them in the same way you cant blame a wild dog for attacking.
But, I can heap every bit of blame on Labour for not questioning the status quo. It was pure ignorance on their behalf.
And now people will die due to Tory austerity.
I think my own position on this is well known
The Labour Treasury team got this horribly wrong
And it was a reason why I decided I never wanted to be a part of it
The difference between Labour’s silly notion of “balancing the books” and that of the Tories isn’t just in the timeline.
Labour could spend more and then fund that through higher taxes (and/or new taxes) on capital and the rich. The Tories being who they are, couldn’t or wouldn’t do that so they would have to cut spending in order to meet the expectation.
The difference then, is between:
” balanced books” with a larger state share of GDP (and, most probably, a larger GDP)
and
“balanced books” with a relatively small state share of GDP (spending cuts and all of the rest of the crap that goes with them)
Needless to say no such “balance” is necessary or appropriate in either case but if I was forced to choose between the two options I know which one I would prefer.
BTW Javid has little or no chance “achieving” the stated aim within 3 years (or 5) which is probably just as well.
Joined-up thinking in short supply so Libertarian Tories run riot! This makes it all the more critical Labour elect a leader who recognises this is the core problem that needs addressing. No sign of this, however, as the major slogan of any candidates!
Ah I spoke too soon! Here is a new Labour Deputy Leader candidate, Rosena Allin-Khan, who’s starting to speak my language:-
“Public service isn’t about identifying who sits on which side of the Labour party. I am Labour because of my values, my life experiences and the fact that I’m a doctor. We must communicate how we are going to change people’s lives in a way they can understand.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/07/labour-must-ditch-ideological-purity-says-rosena-allin-khan
Communicating well has to be synonymous with educating voters something Corbyn didn’t do very well at all, somehow taking it for granted he’d automatically be regarded as the Vanguard Thinker for the Proletariat through some magical process of time-served osmosis!
I admit I am pretty impressed by her
“And it was a reason why I decided I never wanted to be a part of it”..
That’s not what John McDonnell says!!! You wanted a paid role, they said no.. you saying he is a liar?
They offered me a paid role! A peerage was discussed – by them
A peerage is expense only..you wanted a salaried position, McDonnell said no.. then you lost your peerage as well.. that’s the line McDonnell takes anyway
With respect, McDonnell said a number of things that were not true and I am not discussing them with you
What’s all this talk of “libertarian” Tories. I’m no fan of the libertarian Right but I know what they are. This Tory Brexit Govt. just got elected on a populist, nationalist agenda and there’s nothing “libertarian” about that). Libertarianism is out and (as hopelessly confused as it may be in their case) Fascism-lite is in.
Yes, they are more backward than the Financial Times. They’ve basically lied to the North (creating a lot of of one-term-only MPs in the process) and they are dumb enough to burden themselves with a commitment to surplus at a time when both Brexit and global downturn signal a potential disaster.
Even Trump had sense enough to stop worrying about debt and deficit
The Tories really do have a plan to fail. There’s nothing else that it could be.