Skip to main content

Economical with the truth on cutting the deficit.

It is unworthy of coalition ministers to repeat the absurd claim that the government has cut the deficit by a quarter. I hear it repeatedly. It is untrue, or in as much as it has any truth it is an unethical manipulation of statistics; unethical because of the consequences of misrepresenting the financial situation to the public. So where does the claim come from and does it stack up?

The claim comes from a comparison of Public Sector Net Borrowing (PSNB). It is convenient to choose the periods of comparison, for example a low year with the  high year. This is an old statistical trick. The problem of doing this is that the years chosen might contain elements that were exceptional and not typical of the underlying trend or position. This is why it is better to compare longer periods to iron out anomalies, exceptional one off items of expenditure or revenue. Furthermore, running deficits in a given year or period is not necessarily bad. Cutting PSNB is not in itself 'good'.

And this is why the claim made by government ministers is disingenuous. Statistics from the ONS show that for the period April to September 2012, the public sector net borrowing, excluding the temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex), was £37.1 billion, which was £25.4 billion lower than in the same period of the previous year, when PSNB ex was £62.4 billion. It all looks good until you consider exceptional elements, or what factors contributed to the fall.


The April 2012 the net borrowing figures included two one-off transactions. The first was a £28 billion transfer of the Royal Mail Pension Plan and the second was a £2.3 billion transaction to the Government from the closure of the Special Liquidity Scheme.

When the effect of these two one-off transactions is removed, then PSNB in the period April to September 2012 would be £67.4 billion, which would be £4.9 billion higher than in April to September 2011. A decreasing deficit turns into one that has increased.

A better indication of the financial situation would be to consider debt as percentage of GDP, as this would be a measure of its sustainability. By this measure debt has been increasing. Public sector net debt was £1,065.4 billion at the end of September 2012, equivalent to 67.9 per
cent of gross domestic product (GDP).

Running deficits is not in itself an indication of bad financial management. It depends on what underlies the budget deficit. Running deficits resulting from investment, building infrastructure, getting people back to work and increasing productivity and high street sales, can be strategically sensible if it leads to increased revenue in later years that then cuts the deficit.

Bad deficits are of the opposite kind. They result from falling revenue against a background of increased spending on unemployment and welfare, the result of recession. This leads to a bad cycle of cutting spending further which simply aggravates the problem. This I believe is the situation Osborne has got us into.

Cutting budget deficit should not be the aim in the short to medium term. The target should be policies that stimulate growth and increased tax revenue. Simply cutting the deficit is bad strategy.

Postscript

An update on PSNB: For the period April 2012 to January 2013, public sector net borrowing (excluding the capital payment recorded as part of the Royal Mail Pension Plan transfer in April 2012) was £93.8 billion; this is £1.5 billion higher net borrowing than in the same period the previous year, when net borrowing was £92.3 billion.

Public sector net debt was £1,162.8 billion at the end of January 2013, equivalent to 73.8% of gross domestic product (GDP).

The Director General of the British Chambers of Commerce has today called on the government to act speedily with measures to stimulate growth.

“The Chancellor should seize the opportunity in next month's Budget to be radical, and introduce measures that create an environment of enterprise, stimulate export growth, kick-start infrastructure projects and create a structure of business finance which supports growing companies. Above all, these measures should create confidence. Our own research shows that firms across Britain believe they can drive growth this year, but they can’t do it alone. The government must be bold and do all it can to boost confidence so that businesses can create jobs, wealth and ultimately long-term growth.”

Comments

  1. Thank you for an simple clear explanation to a finance ostrich

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,