The Richard J Murphy YouTube Channel
Debate Ammunition
The UK does not need a bailout
Funding the Future | June 2026
Today's topic
The UK does not need a bailout.
The video that this Debate Ammunition supports is available here.
The Core Argument
The Daily Telegraph's claim that the UK faces an IMF bailout because government debt is approaching £3 trillion is deliberate scaremongering built on a fundamental misunderstanding of how sovereign money works.
The UK borrows exclusively in sterling, a currency the government itself ultimately creates through the Bank of England, which means the UK cannot run out of pounds and cannot default.
Far from being a threat to national solvency, government debt in the form of gilts is the bedrock of the entire UK financial system: without it, pension funds, life insurers, and the overnight banking market could not function.
Key Statistics
| Statistic | Figure |
|---|---|
| Projected UK government debt figure cited by The Telegraph | £3 trillion (approximate) |
| Proportion of government deficit conventionally left in the economy each year | Approximately 3% of annual spending |
| Year in which the law requiring the Bank of England to honour a legal government spending instruction was enacted | 1866 |
| Year of the IMF crisis incorrectly cited by The Telegraph as a precedent for current conditions | 1976 |
The Argument Structure
Step 1 — The UK cannot run out of sterling: The UK government borrows exclusively in its own currency. Because the Bank of England is the ultimate creator of sterling, and all banks that issue sterling are regulated by the Bank of England, the UK can always create the money needed to service or repay its debts. This is a technical fact, not a political preference.
Step 2 — The 1970s comparison is false: The 1976 IMF episode arose partly because the UK then held debts denominated in US dollars, inherited from the Second World War, and partly because of a lack of understanding in the aftermath of the final collapse of the gold standard. Those dollar-denominated liabilities no longer exist. The comparison The Telegraph draws is therefore historically illiterate as well as economically wrong.
Step 3 — How government spending and taxation actually work: Government spending is funded by the Bank of England creating money, not by collecting tax first. An analogy Richard uses is spending on a credit card or an overdraft: that spending creates money, the payment does not depend on prior saving. Taxation then reclaims money already spent in order to control inflation; it does not precede or finance the spending. Gilts exist to provide a safe deposit facility for large pools of private money, not to lend the government funds it does not have.
Step 4 — Government debt is the foundation of the financial system: Pension funds, life insurance companies, and banks all depend on gilts as secure, risk-free assets. The London overnight banking market uses government bonds as collateral. Reducing government debt, as The Telegraph demands, would remove those safe assets, force financial institutions into riskier private or foreign substitutes, and destabilise the very financial system the paper claims to be defending. The City of London has no interest in government debt being paid off.
Their Argument → Your Rebuttal
| They Say | Your Response |
|---|---|
| £3 trillion of debt is unsustainable and risks a sovereign debt crisis. | The number is large, but it is denominated entirely in sterling, a currency the UK creates. A country that issues its own currency cannot face a sovereign debt crisis in that currency. The size of the number is irrelevant to solvency. |
| This is like the 1970s. Labour government overspending led to an IMF bailout then, and it could happen again. | In the 1970s the UK still held debts in US dollars, not sterling. That foreign-currency liability no longer exists. The comparison is historically false and The Telegraph knows it. |
| The government must live within its means. Tax revenues and borrowing constrain what it can spend. | This reverses the actual sequence. Government spends first by creating money through the Bank of England; tax then reclaims that money to prevent inflation. There is a law dating from 1866 that requires the Bank of England to honour any legal spending instruction. Spending is not contingent on prior revenue. |
| We should reduce government debt to make the public finances safer. | Reducing government debt means removing gilts from financial markets. Pension funds, insurers, and banks rely on gilts as their safest assets. Without them, those institutions must hold riskier private or foreign debt. The financial system becomes more fragile, not less. The City of London would be the first to object. |
The One-Liner
“The UK cannot run out of sterling, it cannot default on its debt, and the government bonds The Telegraph wants abolished are the very assets on which every pension fund, life insurer, and bank in this country depends.”
Further Reading
| Post | Date | What it covers |
|---|---|---|
| The UK will not be going to the IMF for a bailout | June 2026 | Direct response to The Telegraph's IMF scaremongering; explains why sterling sovereignty makes a bailout technically impossible. |
| The UK government can never go bust | April 2025 | Sets out the fundamental principle that a government issuing its own currency always has the capacity to create money to settle debts. |
| The national debt need never be paid off | March 2026 | Explains why persistent government debt is structurally normal and not a burden requiring repayment; addresses the overseas interest-payment argument. |
| The bond market conspiracy | May 2026 | Addresses claims of bond market pressure on government; explains that pension funds and banks are required to hold gilts and the Bank of England can always intervene. |
| Bonds | October 2025 | Explains what government bonds are actually for: providing safe savings instruments for the financial sector, not funding government spending. |
| Why do governments issue bonds when they don't need to? | August 2024 | Detailed account of how gilt issuance supports the City, pension markets, and overseas trade rather than financing government. |
| There will never be a reason for the UK to ask the IMF for a bailout | August 2025 | Earlier rebuttal of Telegraph-aligned economists claiming 1970s conditions are returning; demolishes the foreign-currency debt comparison. |
| Hyperinflation? Not in the UK | July 2025 | Addresses the companion scare story that government money creation inevitably leads to hyperinflation; explains why UK conditions are structurally different from historical cases. |
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!
[…] The Debate Ammunition for this video is available here. […]
Worth making the point that Singapore which runs a budget surplus issues Government Stock
“Far from being a threat to national solvency, government debt in the form of gilts is the bedrock of the entire UK financial system”
This is true in the USA too since 1789 when Alexander Hamilton convinced George Washington that State’s revolutionary War debt should be assumed by the US Federal Government with bonds (gilts) issued to cover the debt and give the USA financial credibility on the word financial stage (which at that time was The City of London).
The debt was assumed, bonds (gilts) were issued then sold primarily in The City of London.
So hypothetically, the British were, to some degree, financing the war George III had just lost.
MY diatribe is a bit of an over simplification but the foundation of ANY country is “Full Faith and Credit”.
The world of finance is one weird place.
Sure is…