|
Post by Totheleft on Mar 3, 2024 12:18:06 GMT
The Conservatives’ economic record since 2010 From a huge budget deficit to weak GDP and a record rise in tax, we look at the background to the Tory budget
Richard Partington Economics correspondent @rjpartington
Jeremy Hunt will attempt to use next week’s budget to reboot the Conservatives’ flatlining performance in the opinion polls before the next general election, with the chancellor widely expected to announce sweeping tax cuts.
But while Rishi Sunak will be hoping his chancellor delivers a near-term bounce from crowd-pleasing giveaways, his government is facing growing pressure over the Tories’ management of the economy over the past 14 years. Here are 10 charts outlining the Conservatives’ record since 2010.
The deficit
“We can’t go on like this. I’ll cut the deficit, not the NHS,” read David Cameron’s famous campaign poster before the 2010 general election.
After the 2008 global financial crisis cratered Britain’s economy, inflicting the largest government deficit of the postwar era (before the Covid pandemic), the Tories came to power pledging to mend the public finances. Under George Osborne in No 11 this included austerity in the public sector and benefit cuts.
Sunak is also promising to cut the national debt. But the Tories never eliminated the deficit, and the national debt (the sum of every annual shortfall) has steadily risen from 64.7% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2010 to 96.5% currently – the highest level since the 1960s.
The NHS
NHS waiting lists have soared since the Covid pandemic – but were already rising sharply before the health emergency amid workforce shortages and underinvestment in infrastructure.
NHS funding has risen in every year in real terms since 2010, as a ringfenced commitment under the Tories. However, it has increased by far less than the long-term historical average, while a growing and ageing population has added to pressures.
Sunak has committed to cutting NHS waiting lists. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates they will be falling come the election but will not hit pre-Covid levels until at least 2030.
Economic growth
“Long-term economic plan” was a favourite soundbite of the Osborne era. But Britain’s economy has suffered historically weak growth over the past 14 years, after a slow recovery from the 2008 crash; then shocks including Brexit, the Covid pandemic and the cost of living crisis.
The National Institute of Economic and Social Research estimates the UK’s trend annual growth rate has fallen from 3.4% a year in the postwar period up to 1973, to 2.3% up to the 2008 financial crisis, to just 1.2% in the years since.
Underinvestment
Britain historically lags other advanced countries for public and private investment in the economy. However, the UK has fallen further behind since 2010 amid the impact from austerity, Brexit uncertainty and the political drama of five prime ministers in eight years.
The IPPR thinktank estimates the UK has underinvested to the tune of half a trillion pounds, or 30 Elizabeth lines. Most visible in crumbling schools, hospitals and infrastructure, it argues this lack of investment is behind key reasons for lacklustre productivity gains – a key driver of economic growth.
Global Britain?
The narrow Brexit vote in 2016 triggered lasting economic upheaval, including tougher trade barriers with the UK’s largest trading partner. The UK economy has notably underperformed other advanced countries since, with real GDP per capita barely above pre-Covid levels, at 4% above the mid-2016 level, compared with 8% in the eurozone and 15% for the US.
Rather than an explosion in global trade after Brexit, the US investment bank Goldman Sachs estimates total goods trade volumes have underperformed by about 15% compared with other economies, and relative to staying in the EU.
Record increase in taxation
Rising debt interest and growing demand on services from an ageing population have pushed up government spending. But sluggish economic growth has meant weak tax income for the exchequer. In response, Sunak has increased taxes, largely by stealth, to put revenues as a share of the economy on track to hit the highest level since the second world war.
Sunak launched a freeze on income tax and increased corporation tax during his time as chancellor. Even after tax cuts in last year’s autumn statement, and any expected cuts in next week’s budget, taxes are still expected to be higher as a share of national income than when the Conservatives came to power in 2010.
Flatlining wage growth
A weak economy has left workers paying the price. Real wages had grown by an average of 33% a decade from 1970 to 2007, but this fell to below zero in the 2010s. In mid-2023, average pay was back at the level during the 2008 financial crisis, after taking account of inflation.
This 15 years of lost wage growth is estimated by the Resolution Foundation thinktank to have cost the average work £10,700 a year. The performance has been ranked as the worst period for pay growth since the Napoleonic wars ended in 1815.
Food bank usage has spiralled
Poverty has deepened over the past 14 years, leading to an explosion in food bank usage. From fewer than 100,000 in 2010, the number of emergency food parcels from the Trussell Trust has soared to almost 3m a year.
Deep cuts to benefits and rising living costs have outweighed gains from large minimum wage increases for the lowest-income households. These cuts have reduced the incomes of poorest fifth by just under £3,000 a year, according to the Resolution Foundation. This laid the ground for a deeper cost of living crisis as inflation soared after the pandemic and Russian war in Ukraine to the highest level in 41 years.
Unemployment has remained low
An economic bright spot since 2010 has been consistently low unemployment, matching among the lowest levels on records dating to the 1970s. The official jobless rate has fallen from about 8% in 2010 to less than 4%, with a damaging rise prevented during the Covid pandemic by the government’s furlough scheme.
However, the official figures obscure consistently high economic inactivity – when working-age adults are neither in a job nor looking for one. This includes a sharp increase in the number of people outside the labour market due to long-term sickness to a record high of 2.8 million.
Migration has increased sharply
Net immigration to the UK has surged despite Brexit and repeated government promises to reduce it. David Cameron said in early 2010 that if he won the election, he would limit net immigration to “tens of thousands” per year. Net immigration reached a record 745,000 in 2022.
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Mar 3, 2024 12:43:01 GMT
IF ... Labour are the new government later this year, they will face an almost impossible task to (1) repair damage to public services, (2) invest and update public services, (3) find a proper and lasting solution to our Social Care problem, (4) ensure proper defence spending in a very unsecure Europe (5) sort out our housing problems, homelesness and poverty.
Keir Starmer and his team have been listening to economic advisors, and he has repeated the same message of GROWTH for several years now, and Growth is the key to future prosperity, because growth gives the Treasury more money, it automatically shrinks both the deficit and national debt, and it increases prosperity.
Government alone cannot create growth, they can create the conditions for growth, create the catalyst for growth and encourage growth.
Starmer has been criticised for ammending his proposals for £28 Billion Green Investment, but when this was first announced, borrowing was at an historical all time low cost, and as the saying goes you have to "Cut your coat according to your cloth".
A Labour government will not get everything right, there will be mistakes, and perhaps they will not succeed on every pledge, but I think Starmer is been realistic, and I believe people now think that it cannot be any worse than it is now .. so give them a go.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 12:45:31 GMT
IF ... Labour are the new government later this year, they will face an almost impossible task to (1) repair damage to public services, (2) invest and update public services, (3) find a proper and lasting solution to our Social Care problem, (4) ensure proper defence spending in a very unsecure Europe (5) sort out our housing problems, homelesness and poverty. Keir Starmer and his team have been listening to economic advisors, and he has repeated the same message of GROWTH for several years now, and Growth is the key to future prosperity, because growth gives the Treasury more money, it automatically shrinks both the deficit and national debt, and it increases prosperity. Government alone cannot create growth, they can create the conditions for growth, create the catalyst for growth and encourage growth. Starmer has been criticised for ammending his proposals for £28 Billion Green Investment, but when this was first announced, borrowing was at an historical all time low cost, and as the saying goes you have to "Cut your coat according to your cloth". A Labour government will not get everything right, there will be mistakes, and perhaps they will not succeed on every pledge, but I think Starmer is been realistic, and I believe people now think that it cannot be any worse than it is now .. so give them a go. brilliant. So what you are saying is if people vote labour , expect more of the same? Somehow I dont think this is a winning strategy witch finder. Labour are going to talk themselves into a hung parliament at this rate.
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Mar 3, 2024 13:07:14 GMT
IF ... Labour are the new government later this year, they will face an almost impossible task to (1) repair damage to public services, (2) invest and update public services, (3) find a proper and lasting solution to our Social Care problem, (4) ensure proper defence spending in a very unsecure Europe (5) sort out our housing problems, homelesness and poverty. Keir Starmer and his team have been listening to economic advisors, and he has repeated the same message of GROWTH for several years now, and Growth is the key to future prosperity, because growth gives the Treasury more money, it automatically shrinks both the deficit and national debt, and it increases prosperity. Government alone cannot create growth, they can create the conditions for growth, create the catalyst for growth and encourage growth. Starmer has been criticised for ammending his proposals for £28 Billion Green Investment, but when this was first announced, borrowing was at an historical all time low cost, and as the saying goes you have to "Cut your coat according to your cloth". A Labour government will not get everything right, there will be mistakes, and perhaps they will not succeed on every pledge, but I think Starmer is been realistic, and I believe people now think that it cannot be any worse than it is now .. so give them a go. brilliant. So what you are saying is if people vote labour , expect more of the same? Somehow I dont think this is a winning strategy witch finder. Labour are going to talk themselves into a hung parliament at this rate. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you are of the more "orthodox socialist" frame of mind. Realistic economics dictates that you cannot borrow unlimited amounts of money and add to already rising debt to invest in the economy. If Keir Starmer proposed to do this, he would be torn apart by the Tories and the media, and he would risk the commanding lead that Labour now have in every opinion poll. In 1997 Tony Blair promised to stick by the John Major fiscal rules, and this made him watertight from accusations of economic incompetency, he then oversaw the biggest Labour win and majority in history. Of course things will be different, Labour have very different priorities to the Tories, their core voters are ordinary people, and fighting poverty, helping the less well off and the NHS is in Labours DNA, its in their blood, its who they are and what they do.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 13:19:16 GMT
brilliant. So what you are saying is if people vote labour , expect more of the same? Somehow I dont think this is a winning strategy witch finder. Labour are going to talk themselves into a hung parliament at this rate. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you are of the more "orthodox socialist" frame of mind. Realistic economics dictates that you cannot borrow unlimited amounts of money and add to already rising debt to invest in the economy. If Keir Starmer proposed to do this, he would be torn apart by the Tories and the media, and he would risk the commanding lead that Labour now have in every opinion poll. In 1997 Tony Blair promised to stick by the John Major fiscal rules, and this made him watertight from accusations of economic incompetency, he then oversaw the biggest Labour win and majority in history. Of course things will be different, Labour have very different priorities to the Tories, their core voters are ordinary people, and fighting poverty, helping the less well off and the NHS is in Labours DNA, its in their blood, its who they are and what they do. it doesn't matter what frame of mind I am. Your party is looking for our votes , and im asking what exactly are we voting for if we lend labour our votes? how will things be different? you aren't making much sense to me witch finder.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 13:24:41 GMT
brilliant. So what you are saying is if people vote labour , expect more of the same? Somehow I dont think this is a winning strategy witch finder. Labour are going to talk themselves into a hung parliament at this rate. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you are of the more "orthodox socialist" frame of mind. Realistic economics dictates that you cannot borrow unlimited amounts of money and add to already rising debt to invest in the economy. If Keir Starmer proposed to do this, he would be torn apart by the Tories and the media, and he would risk the commanding lead that Labour now have in every opinion poll. In 1997 Tony Blair promised to stick by the John Major fiscal rules, and this made him watertight from accusations of economic incompetency, he then oversaw the biggest Labour win and majority in history. Of course things will be different, Labour have very different priorities to the Tories, their core voters are ordinary people, and fighting poverty, helping the less well off and the NHS is in Labours DNA, its in their blood, its who they are and what they do. realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries.
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Mar 3, 2024 13:47:44 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you are of the more "orthodox socialist" frame of mind. Realistic economics dictates that you cannot borrow unlimited amounts of money and add to already rising debt to invest in the economy. If Keir Starmer proposed to do this, he would be torn apart by the Tories and the media, and he would risk the commanding lead that Labour now have in every opinion poll. In 1997 Tony Blair promised to stick by the John Major fiscal rules, and this made him watertight from accusations of economic incompetency, he then oversaw the biggest Labour win and majority in history. Of course things will be different, Labour have very different priorities to the Tories, their core voters are ordinary people, and fighting poverty, helping the less well off and the NHS is in Labours DNA, its in their blood, its who they are and what they do. realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries. Meanwhile in Scotland UPDATED Scottish deficit in 2023–24 'revised up from £9bn to closer to £18bn' 3rd April 2023 GERS By Andrew Learmonth @andrewlearmonth Journalist IFS: Scottish deficit in 2023–24 'revised up from £9bn to closer to £18bn' IFS: Scottish deficit in 2023–24 'revised up from £9bn to closer to £18bn' Scotland’s notional deficit could be about £1,300 per person higher than the UK as a whole due to the impact of falling oil and gas prices, according to analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). In their latest forecast, the thinktank warns of a "notable deterioration in the outlook for Scotland’s public finances," and says "tax rises or spending cuts would likely need to be even larger" after independence
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Mar 3, 2024 14:03:48 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you are of the more "orthodox socialist" frame of mind. Realistic economics dictates that you cannot borrow unlimited amounts of money and add to already rising debt to invest in the economy. If Keir Starmer proposed to do this, he would be torn apart by the Tories and the media, and he would risk the commanding lead that Labour now have in every opinion poll. In 1997 Tony Blair promised to stick by the John Major fiscal rules, and this made him watertight from accusations of economic incompetency, he then oversaw the biggest Labour win and majority in history. Of course things will be different, Labour have very different priorities to the Tories, their core voters are ordinary people, and fighting poverty, helping the less well off and the NHS is in Labours DNA, its in their blood, its who they are and what they do. realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries. You seem to like pointing to the world wide recession that just shows how Devious you are the reality is something You are blind to reality. The case for Blair is that the economy has grown in a steady and uninterrupted manner for a decade, with falling unemployment, low inflation and rising living standards. Help has been provided for the less well-off through the minimum wage and tax credits; large-scale investment in schools and hospitals has been made possible by the absence of the sort of financial crisis that hobbled previous labour government.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 14:07:49 GMT
realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries. Meanwhile in Scotland UPDATED Scottish deficit in 2023–24 'revised up from £9bn to closer to £18bn' 3rd April 2023 GERS By Andrew Learmonth @andrewlearmonth Journalist IFS: Scottish deficit in 2023–24 'revised up from £9bn to closer to £18bn' IFS: Scottish deficit in 2023–24 'revised up from £9bn to closer to £18bn' Scotland’s notional deficit could be about £1,300 per person higher than the UK as a whole due to the impact of falling oil and gas prices, according to analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). In their latest forecast, the thinktank warns of a "notable deterioration in the outlook for Scotland’s public finances," and says "tax rises or spending cuts would likely need to be even larger" after independence its a terrible advert for your union isnt it , after three centuries , you still can't get the Scottish economy running smoothly and running well. Its your parliament that controls almost all of the levers that power Scotlands economy .Holyrood wasn't designed to do so.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 14:11:16 GMT
realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries. You seem to like pointing to the world wide recession that just shows how Devious you are the reality is something You are blind to reality. The case for Blair is that the economy has grown in a steady and uninterrupted manner for a decade, with falling unemployment, low inflation and rising living standards. Help has been provided for the less well-off through the minimum wage and tax credits; large-scale investment in schools and hospitals has been made possible by the absence of the sort of financial crisis that hobbled previous labour government. Blair governed I the sunshine of an economic boom he didnt create , and still managed to crash the economy and leave billions of PFI debt , among many other problems. Unemployment was higher when new labour were kicked out of power in 2010 , than what they found it in 1997.
Tony Blair’s Labour party entered government in May 1997 with unemployment at 7.2%. By the time the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government took office in May 2010, unemployment had risen to 7.9%.
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Mar 3, 2024 14:16:57 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you are of the more "orthodox socialist" frame of mind. Realistic economics dictates that you cannot borrow unlimited amounts of money and add to already rising debt to invest in the economy. If Keir Starmer proposed to do this, he would be torn apart by the Tories and the media, and he would risk the commanding lead that Labour now have in every opinion poll. In 1997 Tony Blair promised to stick by the John Major fiscal rules, and this made him watertight from accusations of economic incompetency, he then oversaw the biggest Labour win and majority in history. Of course things will be different, Labour have very different priorities to the Tories, their core voters are ordinary people, and fighting poverty, helping the less well off and the NHS is in Labours DNA, its in their blood, its who they are and what they do. realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries. You seem to like pointing to the world wide recession that just shows how Devious you are the reality is something You are blind to reality. The case for Blair is that the economy has grown in a steady and uninterrupted manner for a decade, with falling unemployment, low inflation and rising living standards. Help has been provided for the less well-off through the minimum wage and tax credits; large-scale investment in schools and hospitals has been made possible by the absence of the sort of financial crisis that hobbled previous labour government.
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Mar 3, 2024 14:19:58 GMT
You seem to like pointing to the world wide recession that just shows how Devious you are the reality is something You are blind to reality. The case for Blair is that the economy has grown in a steady and uninterrupted manner for a decade, with falling unemployment, low inflation and rising living standards. Help has been provided for the less well-off through the minimum wage and tax credits; large-scale investment in schools and hospitals has been made possible by the absence of the sort of financial crisis that hobbled previous labour government. Blair governed I the sunshine of an economic boom he didnt create , and still managed to crash the economy and leave billions of PFI debt , among many other problems. Unemployment was higher when new labour were kicked out of power in 2010 , than what they found it in 1997.
Tony Blair’s Labour party entered government in May 1997 with unemployment at 7.2%. By the time the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government took office in May 2010, unemployment had risen to 7.9%. Your being Devious again pointing to the world wide reccesion .
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Mar 3, 2024 14:21:02 GMT
borrowing-percent-gdp-69-14 Commentary At the start of 2007, there were few economists expressing concern at government debt running at 36% of GDP. By post-war standards, UK government debt was very low and the government appeared to be meeting its own reasonable fiscal targets.
Given the period of strong economic growth, it is unsurprising that Labour wished to increase spending on health care and education. If the financial crisis hadn’t materialised, we may have looked back on the great moderation with kinder eyes.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 14:23:58 GMT
realistic economics and new labour dont mix witchfinder. Tony Blair inherited the best balanced books of any incoming prime minister in modern uk history , and by the time his party were kicked out of power 13 long years later , they left the incoming tory coalition government a note saying there is no money left. I wouldn't put labour in charge of a piggy bank never mind the uk economy , between helping cause the financial crash , shitloads of pfi debt they indebted generations of uk taxpayers with , to the general financial incompetence despite governing in the sunshine of an economic boom which was largely not of their creation. If any one is daft enough to vote for labour , I sincerely hope they aren't too disappointed with the result. I dread the thought of clowns like reeve and starmer making the decisions to govern all our countries. You seem to like pointing to the world wide recession that just shows how Devious you are the reality is something You are blind to reality. The case for Blair is that the economy has grown in a steady and uninterrupted manner for a decade, with falling unemployment, low inflation and rising living standards. Help has been provided for the less well-off through the minimum wage and tax credits; large-scale investment in schools and hospitals has been made possible by the absence of the sort of financial crisis that hobbled previous labour government. are you actually reading my posts? Blairs labour left unemployment higher than when they found it. That is a fact. he failed the working classes , and failed to stop inequality increasing. How Blairism Failed the Working Class
Despite pursuing a number of redistributive policies, Blair's Labour government left the fundamental architecture of Thatcher's economy in place – and failed to break the cycle of deepening inequality.tribunemag.co.uk/2021/04/did-blairism-work
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Mar 3, 2024 14:26:09 GMT
Blair governed I the sunshine of an economic boom he didnt create , and still managed to crash the economy and leave billions of PFI debt , among many other problems. Unemployment was higher when new labour were kicked out of power in 2010 , than what they found it in 1997.
Tony Blair’s Labour party entered government in May 1997 with unemployment at 7.2%. By the time the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government took office in May 2010, unemployment had risen to 7.9%. Your being Devious again pointing to the world wide reccesion . im stating fact. New labour increased unemployment , and the banking crash was in large part due to their illiterate lack of putting curbs and regulations on bankers. you simply want to take credit for an economic boom you didnt create , while passing the blame for all the bad things new labour did to anyone else who you think can take them.
|
|