Emma Reynolds MP, a Labour Treasury minister, has been out on the media round this morning, lying through her back teeth.
She claimed that the UK government is nowhere near austerity. This is nonsense.
Austerity, in terms of government policy, refers to measures aimed at reducing public sector debt and budget deficits through spending cuts, tax increases, or both. This is exactly why the government is cutting disability benefits and austerity is, in any event, a policy choice, which Labour has taken.
There is no public sector debt problem. There isn't a deficit problem in the UK. There is no need to balance a budget. Labour has chosen to make these issues. So it has chosen austerity.
Reynolds did, however, claim such problems really do exist. She claimed that one pound in every ten the UK government spends is on debt interest. This is blatantly untrue. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility this is the total UK government income and spending forecast for the year 2024/25, and next year will presumably be much the same:
The same data source suggests that in the year in question the UK government's net interest payments on the national debt will be £104.9 billion. That means that just over one pound in every twelve that the government spends is on interest.
That is a massive mistatement of the truth involving an error of more than £20 billion.
As, however, I have noted this morning, about one-third of this sum is paid on government debt owned by the UK government. Give or take, that sum is around £35 billion, and the rate of interest on this sum could be set by the Treasury if it so wished - saving massive sums each year. But the government refuses to do that.
So, Emma Reynolds lied through her back teeth on this issue. What she said was knowingly wrong based on information that must be available to her. That is why I use the word. Her only defence is that she is ignorant. I am presuming she is not.
Then, when asked what her values were, she said she was committed to equality. However, her choice is to favour markets and banks by punishing the most vulnerable. The word equality has a new dystopian meaning in her vocabulary.
Add Reynolds to the list of those who have had an empathy bypass. It is growing by the day as the Labour march to neo-fascism continues, unabated.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!
Thank you, Richard.
The City approves of Reynolds, though, as per: https://thefinancialanalyst.net/2025/01/14/emma-reynolds-city-minister-role-a-game-changer-for-uk-economy/. There are more like her waiting in the wings.
No wonder her perception of equality is so distorted.
Emma can’t help it.
She is just a well looked after avatar – an empty vessel controlled by unseen hands, and entirely biddable.
Aye PSR
A quick web search finds this:
Following her departure from parliament in 2019, Reynolds was appointed as Managing Director of Public Affairs, Policy & Research at TheCityUK, a special interest group lobbying the UK Government on behalf of the financial sector.[22]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Reynolds#Post-parliamentary_career
Which broken link, after a bit of searching will find:
“TheCityUK appoints leading industry practitioner to head up Public Affairs, Policy and Research”
https://www.thecityuk.com/news/thecityuk-appoints-leading-industry-practitioner-to-head-up-public-affairs-policy-and-research/
Confirming that Emma Reynolds was previously Managing Director of Public Affairs, Policy and Research at TheCityUK, having previously been a Front Bench appointee under Ed Miliband.
A City insider, then.
Of course we are living under conditions of austerity. The fiscal rules determine that, given the long term performance of the the UK economy, under the fiscal rules, and fifteen years of austerity. It is inevitable.
The problem of benefits rising fast, because of increasing non-employment and mental health leads deeply ignorant politicians, journalists and spads to ask the wrong questions. They ask one question only; how do we oblige them to return to work? It is the wrong question.
The right question is this. Why is it that after fifteen years of Austerity; of economic stagnation of the failure of all Governments, politicians and Parliament to do anything but make most people’s life much worse, less liveable, less hopeful; large numbers of the population have given up – on Britain. There is no hope. There is no other way, they are told. There is just another thirty years of what you see. They have given up because they know, heart of hearts, it is never going to change. It is never going to be allowed to change. Vote any way you like; you will be faced with the Single Transferable Party. Give up, you can’t win.
They have given up. And let me conclude with this. You can bully them. You can deprive them. You will never produce the economic growth you crave with the attitudes and policies you pursue. You satisfy only those whom this dire, corrupt world serves best. The truth is anyone who has run a business does not want people who do not want to be there.
If too many people are sick; the gulty parties are in the Conservative and Labour Governments that have relentlessly brought us here, over forty years. This is what you have done. This is your creation.
Agreed
Apparently austerity policies are based on a spreadsheet.
See “The error that could subvert George Osborne’s austerity programme”
“The theories on which the chancellor based his cuts policies have been shown to be based on an embarrassing mistake” — The Guardian (2013)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/18/uncovered-error-george-osborne-austerity
There’s more to it than that.
But that error helped create the narrative that continues even now.
Has anyone reminded Starmer and Reeves that
“Labour said the chancellor’s plans had lost credibility. “We warned that rapid fiscal tightening when the global economy is weak risked backfiring and that’s what has happened. The idea of expansionary fiscal contraction has been exposed as total nonsense,” said Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor”
But they are still doing it!
The constant message coming from the US especially the Heritage Foundation is that the state must not be providing services for the disadvantaged, they must pay or sink.
Opposition is not permitted. Look at what the Republicans are doing to journalists, people who protest, universities, judges, calling them traitors and issuing court cases to silence them
UK politicians, main stream media, the City peddle the same destructive ” we can do nothing but cut” and we do not permit criticism.
What is the right wing approach to free speech? Nothing but to stop different views being aired.
Get the first outrageous quote in and then it’s very difficult to counter.
Thank you, John.
Just before the general election, the Heritage Foundation, part-funded by the Koch family, hosted Lammy and Kinnock in NYC and Washington. At one of the events and thinking the cameras were not rolling, Lammy said there was much common ground between Labour and the Trump team.
The Heritage Foundation used the big pharma and insurer dominated Swiss model and helped Mitt Romney implement it as Romneycare in Massachusetts. They then helped, along with Citigroup, Obama get it implemented as Obamacare. This is why I say it does not matter who sits in the White House.
The Heritage Foundation and United Health are amongst the US parties advising Labour on privatising the NHS and much else.
This is why I support MAGA, make America go away.
MAKE AMERICA GO AWAY
You made me laugh, Colonel. Thank you.
Very good, Colonel. Heh, heh.
Labour spokespeople are not allowed even a smidgen of diffe ence from Starmer/Reeves in their utterances.
To be fair to BBC – she was asked was there somewhere else they could get the money from . She didn’t answer directly – but said they had taxed non doms and done something on windfall taxes and inheritance ; Implication being – they had done as much as they could.
They never get asked Richard’s question about ‘welfare payments ‘to upper income pension contributors- or how many billions that is.
Broadcast politics is just so predictable – just intoning – Abbott on one side and Reynolds on the other – no journalistic curiosity to enquire or probe, or enlighten and educate listeners/viewers.
I leant myself £100 this morning @ 4% and I’ll pay it back next month, when everything will go back to……exactly what it was before I leant myself money & paid myself interest on that money. One wonders that the imbeciles (i.e. those that interview politicos) are unable to question the empty vessel in those terms. Oh hang on a sec, they all live in the same little bubble and that sort of questioning could be upsetting – & we can’t have that – can we? after all – questioning like that might inform Uk serfs of the real state of affairs & that would be BAD.
Martin Wolf now seems to agree with you about paying interest on bank reserves (though he doesn’t give you credit for pushing this): https://www.ft.com/content/e42c2fe1-55ae-47cf-bb0c-3f5b659f1f8a Better late than never, I guess.
There is much e3lse we disagree on.
And whenver we have met ( and we have) he seems unable to hide his animosity. I don’t know why. I reckpon I am prettyy fair to him.
I know I bang on about “words” and how their meanings are being distorted, but it’s really important. The people “out there “ who are suffering the hardships imposed by 10 years of austerity do listen to what the Government (Single Transferable Party) says. They listen in the hope that something might be announced which could, possibly, improve their lives. So the words the Government uses are vital, as they need to mean the same to the listener as they do to the speaker.
This is not happening. So when I hear “this Government is committed to….(insert own choice of bollox)” I KNOW that statement has sod all to do with whatever ghastliness has prompted it. You might as well push a button to hear a recorded voice and choose the answer you’d like. It won’t change the reality. I am, for example, committed to losing weight. That commitment is rock solid and I have never wavered from it. Have I taken any actual ACTION to fulfil my commitment? No.
I could provide countless examples of statements the Government has made which use words to mean something other than the actual meaning heard by listeners. I could, but I’d be preaching to the converted. Suffice it to say that what the Government SAYS is not what people HEAR. I believe this is deliberate.
When an individual holds – or is forced to hold – two or more incompatible beliefs simultaneously, they experience what is called “cognitive dissonance”. This produces psychological stress – discomfort which the individual then attempts to reconcile, in order to restore consistency/congruence. The cognitive dissonance in our current political climate arises from the Government stating that they are improving people’s lives, when for millions of us that is patently not true. Anticipatory cognitive dissonance is feeling all that in advance. Being unable to reconcile what one is told – by Government – with the reality someone is experiencing both increases psychological stress and forces individuals to stop listening.
So every time a Minister opens their mouth, millions of people stop listening. And they disengage, to protect their own mental health. And words become devalued and, effectively, meaningless. That is very dangerous. Because when someone in the public eye DOES offer a credible alternative, no one believes them.
Wittgenstein would be proud of you.
You are right.
So was he.
“When an individual holds – or is forced to hold – two or more incompatible beliefs simultaneously”: in 1984, Orwell called this doublethink. I have always thought this term carried a sinister tone.
Steven Keen has a good video out explaining what Rachel Reeves and the Labour government are doing, and why it is wrong.
“Rachel Reeves is Wrong” Top Economist Warns the UK” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FW6K7vaDxSg
I will take a look
UK establishment will stick with the US through thick and thin. I think recent UK help re persuading the Ukraine regarding the “deal” with the US illustrate this if further evidence was needed. Money, power, miltary links, think tanks, huge US firms, personal relationships all bond our elites to the US.
We are stuck fast if you are on the right and centre in politics. The left perhaps less stuck but they have no chance of attaining power in the UK. It really is TINA from a great power politics poverty.
Thoroughly depressing if you believe in such things as truth, honour, decency.
What kind of world are we leaving our children/grandchildren?