{"id":89959,"date":"2026-02-12T07:48:05","date_gmt":"2026-02-12T07:48:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=89959"},"modified":"2026-02-12T07:48:05","modified_gmt":"2026-02-12T07:48:05","slug":"the-neoliberal-democrats","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2026\/02\/12\/the-neoliberal-democrats\/","title":{"rendered":"The NeoLiberal Democrats"},"content":{"rendered":"

As the FT has reported<\/a>:<\/p>\n

The Liberal Democrats have set out plans to replace the UK Treasury with a \u201cDepartment for Growth\u201d in Birmingham, in a bid to close the \u201cyawning gap\u201d between London and the rest of the country and boost economic fortunes.<\/p>\n

Daisy Cooper, deputy leader of the centrist opposition party, said redesigning the Treasury \u2014 which is responsible for public spending, the tax system and financial services policy \u2014 would help \u201cend the cost of living crisis\u201d and \u201cget Britain growing again\u201d.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Let me be clear that I support breaking up the Treasury and curtailing its power. There are several good reasons for doing so.<\/p>\n

Firstly, it is over-powerful, making the absurdly titled Chancellor of the Exchequer overly powerful as a result. This has harmed good government in this country for decades.<\/p>\n

Second, the 'Treasury view', which has always embraced the household analogy, balanced budgets, and a belief in small government, has also been profoundly harmful to national well-being and might only be broken by breaking it up.<\/p>\n

Third, the disconnect between the Treasury and the country has been deeply alarming. Rarely has such an insular view been so detrimental to well-being.<\/p>\n

So, you might expect me to welcome this move.<\/p>\n

I do not. It is deeply inappropriate. It reveals a fundamental lack of judgment on the LibDems part. It puts growth at the centre of its plans, and GDP growth, which is undoubtedly what is being referred to, has been and will continue to be a dangerous goal for the government in this country. I provided many of my reasons for saying so here recently<\/a>.\u00a0 Let me summarise them, briefly, again, though. They are that GDP growth:<\/p>\n