Just sharing this here:
Suggestions, anyone?
Therese Coffey did not dispute the £60 billion figure when on the media round this morning.
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:
Since Scotland costs so much to run, why not let us go?
GERS tells me that this would save the UK about, let me look it up, actually skip that. Who cares. Just let us out of here!
Thanks, David. I really needed that belly laugh.
Yes
Tackle fraud in Local & Central Government; which would prevent £10-15bn going into the wrong hands, according to The Centre for Counter Fraud Studies at Portsmouth University.
That would find £2 billi0on, I agree
You will never stop it
It is also rampant in the private sector
Is there a rabbit to pull from the hat? How much would it save the Treasury if the Bank of England stopped paying interest at the base rate on reserves deposited by commercial banks? About £60 billion pa at current rates?
If rates go to 4% then £36bn or so
I would try for less – but £30 bn is possible
Last month the Financial Times as reported as saying that Brexit costs us about £40 billion in lost revenue.
Would it harm the electoral prospects of Keir Starmer and Sir Ed Davey to point that out?
They disagree on that
Ed Davey does so
Keir Starmer does not
Truss has talked openly about increasing the defence budget to 3% of GDP by the end of the decade. Ben Wallace has talked about a substancial increase in funds and indeed may have based his support for Truss on that. Actually cutting the budget will go down very badly, but do most people care? I do as it happens but I won’t bore anyone with the treadbare state of the navy.
How about scrapping Trident?
Could be done, but not that much
How about giving HMRC the resources to tackle the £35bn tax gap ?
Definitely
How about an audit in the NHS and Civil Service to see how much is wasted on projects created and strung-out by contractors and management consultants.
Sounds like a job for management consultants under the guise of “efficiency savings.” I feel that’s already been done a few times in the past 12 years of Tory government though.
It is hard to ignore the fact that large amounts of public spending goes towards pensions, care and health. I can only presume they mean to privatise the NHS.
Who is charging the sovereign Government £45 million interest on using its own effing money? Tell whoever it is ‘owed to’, to sod off.
What is not mentioned in the chart:
Claw back all the money over paid to suppliers and shamsters during Covid.
Where is the expenditure on the Royal Family/Civil list and foregone revenue as a result?
How much is spent on delivering ‘democracy’? Get rid of the House of Lords and have one house to rule them all.
It is £45 *billion*. (Millions, billions: it is all a big number.)
That is what happens when there are over £2,000 billion of gilts in issue (albeit a large chunk held through the Bank of England’s asset purchase facility+ for the Treasury).
Large chunks of the debt is held, for example, by pension funds and by insurance companies who pay annuities to pensioners.
Agreed – bring charged interest on money that you’ve lent is insanity
Whoever agreed to that should be sacked and stripped of any titles, pensions, etc
How about we charge the banks interest on the money we lent instead ?
That’s 45 billion saved on interest paid and another 45 billion on interest received, total saving 90 billion !!!
I am not convinced you can double it
Just give all public sector workers a pay rise, employ all the unemployed in suitable jobs, and you have £60-billion entering the economy. You also cut benefits, raise more taxes, reduce mental health issues due to stress and anxiety, and everyone wins. Now if only the government had access to that kind of money.
Discussed this black hole with golf partners today. All agreed INCREASE HIGHER RATES OF INCOME TAX. All are retired but with work related pensions. All agreed we could afford to pay more tax if it meant protecting vulnerable people.