Rachel Reeves claims fiscal responsibility but does the opposite, boosting spending and borrowing. With the agreement of all parties the covid lockdowns destroyed fiscal discipline and hugely expanded the public debt, making it more imperative we take great care now. Indeed the Opposition parties argued for even more spending and for a longer lockdown than the government supplied.
Correcting the public accounts today needs to start with cuts to wasteful and undesirable spending. I have long argued for a big reduction in Bank of England losses. £15bn off the annual cost would be relatively easy to achieve. I have argued for a smaller civil service, back to the levels of ten years ago, reducing overhead by more than a quarter through a ban on most recruitment for the Parliament. Natural wastage reduces costs by around 7-8% a year. I would delay the planned carbon capture and storage programme all the time our competitors are not imposing this additional cost on themselves.
I would continue the work of both recent governments with more policy changes to help and persuade more people into work. Many billions would be saved and extra tax collected . This would be assisted by a big reduction in legal migration and more effective controls to cut illegal migration. Inviting in so many low pay and no pay migrants results in large public spending costs on hotels, subsidised homes, school places, NHS capacity and infrastructure demands.
Armed with a realistic annual reduction of at least £20 bn rising to £50bn over the Parliament the government would be free to cut some taxes that could stimulate growth and reduce borrowing levels. The current vicious circle is higher taxes, lower growth, bigger deficit, more cuts, market worries leading to higher interest charges. We need to move to a virtuous cycle, Lower tax rates, more revenue, less spending, less borrowing, lower interest costs. The 10 year borrowing cost is currently a costly 4.7%, well above the Conservative levels, thanks to borrowing and spending so much more.
With debt interest at over £100 bn we cannot afford irresponsibility.
June 6, 2025
Good morning.
What concerns me now is that the Chancer is coercing the pension funds in investing in government projects, projects that is unlikely to provide a return. Essentially damaging an industry that has done well and so is being forced to redistribute the wealth of fundholders to those who have not contributed via government projects.
June 6, 2025
In addition bringing unused Personal Pension funds into the IHT calculation for taxing at 40% when you pass on if you make 75 years of age. Then taxing your beneficiaries at their tax rare when they withdraw what is left of it, thus between 60-80% tax in total on your pension fund. Legalised theft really, and another nail in the coffin of try to provide for yourself and family.
June 6, 2025
The best course of action now is to access your pension and then pass on as much of it as possible/practical to your chosen heirs when you are confident of living another 7 years, and then spend the rest having a nice rest-of-your-life.
Planning for the future and seeking to provide for yourself as you age is not encouraged by the Marxists in Government.
June 6, 2025
Exactly Donna. My wife passed away last year and I’m ina position of having significant assets and a decent pension. I’ll be swapping my 2 year old car, not for an EV. And having work done on the house
My family will receive as much as I can give them under the radar as well as legitimately. My accountant tells me every pound I spend is depriving the taxman of 40p. That’s my mantra now.
June 6, 2025
The lady from Complaints does not understand that she has tipped ‘oh well IHT has to be paid’, to anything ‘I can do to deprive the thieving b’tard of my estate, I will!’
Probably hundreds of thousands of elderly people all working on using their worth in any way to avoid IHT, foreign cars, worldwide cruises, luxuries previously not considered, numerous small gifts, Trusts etc.
Ignorance unlimited.!
June 6, 2025
Not a good course of action if there are vulnerable beneficiaries. At the least you’d need to leave it to a trust and hope the trustees are trustworthy and competent while you have to deal with the increasingly complicated tax reporting before you pop your clogs, hoping you can last the 7 years despite the stress.
A pension passed as a pension would at least offer some income rather than be a tempting lump of capital for the “professionals” and the government bandits to thieve
June 6, 2025
Anyone who has substantial funds in a pension that they have not taken by the time they are 75 is using the tax benefits of pensions savings for tax avoidance. Those funds would have been taxed as earnings if they weren’t protected by a pension wrapper.
This tax avoidance scheme is only available to the rather wealthy who have many other ways of hiding their money from tax. If they targeted funds in pensions at or before retirement age that would be grasping but this seems to me to be closing a loophole only available to the few.
June 6, 2025
N S
Reason you keep it invested is to keep the fund growing (whilst you take some out) because annuities are such poor value for those who have funded their entire pension pot themselves.
You should know it takes at least 20 years to get your own money back with an Annuity, when you could have probably doubled the original sum invested in those 20 years.
No employer contribution for the self employed, all their own money.
Thus not for the wealthy, just for the sensible.
Retrospective tax change is simply legalised robbery because you cannot do anything about it, change the rules by all means for those who are still to take put a new pension, as they will then be wise, but not for people who have planned and saved for 40 years to try and provide for themselves.
June 6, 2025
As I understood it, the taxation applies to the pot if it is untouched.
If it applies to funds drawn down sensibly as your write above then I withdraw my previous comment Alan.
June 6, 2025
NS
IHT as proposed in 2027 will apply to the unspent amount within the Pension Fund at 40% when you pass if you have total assets over £1,000,000 (using both couples allowances) not difficult if you live in London, then when your beneficiaries eventually draw down on that fund they will also pay tax at their going rate, so could be 20-45%. Thus the total from the unspent amount within the fund is first taxed at 40% then another 20-45%.
If you are single with no children then your limit is £325,000 before you pay 40% IHT again not difficult if you own a 1 bedroom flat inside the M25 and have a pension or savings.
June 6, 2025
They can’t pass that money on now, though, NS. If they leave it in the pension not drawn down with tax paid, their children will pay double tax+IHT. Thats why so many professionals have suddenly retired in their late 50s to early 60s.
June 6, 2025
If it is being left there for inheritance purposes Alone Tracey it should be taken out and passed on using the 7 year rule.
June 6, 2025
So is your solution that the prudent individuals must deplete all their pensions and savings by the time they are 75..
PS If you have any savings you are practicing tax evasion on the first 1000 interest currently.
Will you be advocating that all public sector individuals must give up a significant chunk of their pension/pay higher levels of tax on their pension once they reach 75?
June 6, 2025
Defined benefit pensioners make these decisions; those people with a guaranteed income for life. They don’t need different savings vehicles because they get an enhanced payment that people in private sector pensions would require pots of £5m to achieve. Someone will come along in the future and tax their fat pensions.
June 6, 2025
There are plenty of current pensioners receiving private sector DB pensions.
June 6, 2025
@PP – But many private sector workers, especially the self-employed, do not. A-Tracy is absolutely correct that the people making and imposing these decisions are isolated from their effects by getting a DB pension.
At least one of them has his very own act of parliament to protect his gold plated pension.
June 6, 2025
a-tracy
Exactly, not many defined benefit schemes with Commercial organisation now as they cannot afford to fund them.
Defined benefit schemes, many gold plated, are the privilege of our elected politicians, and many other civil service personal and government employees.
They say they contribute, and indeed they do out of their fully 100% funded taxpayer salaries, they also get a huge contribution from their employers who is also 100% tax funded by the taxpayer, and their tax relief is also 100% funded by the tax payer.
And these people make the rules for those of us who ave 100% funded ourselves, they simply do not have a clue what the real commercial world is like.
June 6, 2025
Glad you highlight this ridiculous situation as over 75yr olds are torn between drawing down ever dwindling modest pensions for their anticipated minimal quality of life and health with rising inflation and the inability to avoid being penalised unfairly again just for taking responsibility by saving money for your old age.
Eventually you will have no personal pensions left and come to rely on the state generosity or otherwise by default.
Lifting the minimum income tax to start from £20k should have been a reality for both pensioners and boost growth and reduce debt getting people off benefits and into work plus save HMRC bureaucracy costs for so little tax take.
Pensioners feel like they are being robbed with the present system and know Reeves doesn’t understand nor care. Withdrawal of the WFP was very heartless given the present taxing pensions nonsense.
June 6, 2025
@Berkshire Alan. – you tax those that cant complain or don’t vote for you
June 6, 2025
It’s already been done for years through workplace pensions, and most of those poor people think they’re going to get a decent return when they’re not.
June 6, 2025
Anyone who reads their annual pension statement can’t surely believe they are going to get a decent amount can they?
June 7, 2025
Sadly NS few bother to do any real calculations, that is why so many suggest they get screwed over with finance deals of one sort or another when the figures are clear to see on any agreement.
Fact of the matter is it is politicians who have got the Country into this god awful financial state of huge debt (not the public) that we are all now having to fund Via taxation.
If you have been prudent yourself why should you pay for other peoples mistakes, errors, feckless ways.
June 7, 2025
The article below is US based but I think very relevant to the UK DC situation:
advisorperspectives.com 19/05/2025 ‘A 401(k) in every pot? A glidepath to nowhere’, W.Bernstein, E.McQuarrie.
UK related:
– pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk 07/2003 ‘The shift from Defined Benefit to Defined Contribution’.
The last paragraph made the point that apart from people with (good) financial advisors (and who would listened to the advice) the majority unfortunately thought that whatever they were previously contributing would ensure a ‘reasonable’ pension. A 8% contribution is far from being enough, but who can afford the advised 15%?
– researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk 19/05/2020 ‘Pension freedoms: Transfers from defined benefit pension schemes’. 17pp.
And then … moneymarketing.co.uk 19/03/2019 ‘Have 30 years of the SIPP been a blessing or curse?’
June 7, 2025
Hefner
I have no problem with whatever the Government want to introduce to Pensions as long at it does not affect existing plans.
Retrospective taxation is simply legalised theft, because you can do nothing about it.
There are many rules and penalties with regards to pension funds, you simply cannot move them about or withdraw them at will, without some form of tax penalty or age qualification.
Make new rules for new pensions if you like, then those who are considering taking them up can assess them, and make a decision before they start.
A Pension is a very long term investment with many made up of 40 years or more contributions, leave existing rules as they are, you get some tax relief when you invest, you pay tax on it when you withdraw from it, so the Government is not losing any tax income with the present rules in place.
June 6, 2025
Yes to all you say, but additionally Nett Zero must go. Energy at an artificial four times costs in the USA is no incentive to productive investment.
June 6, 2025
It seems to me that the political parties that have been in charge since 1997, when government spending was last briefly under control, lack the will to exercise fiscal responsibility. Indeed some seem to have little or no idea what it entails. Even if they do, it is someone else’s problem in the next parliament or beyond. Hence the farcical focus on OBR forecasts five years down the road. This is the perfect device to dodge the bullet of fiscal responsibility. It should be dropped forthwith and replaced with a going concern test of the governments ability to pay it’s way over the next twelve months. Such an approach would have brutal consequences in the short run. But that is a better way to get out of control spending under control than reliance on the demands of the bond vigilantes.
June 6, 2025
We’re not going to get fiscal responsibility from Two-Tier and his Student Union Marxists, any more than we got it from the LibCONs who drove the economy and the Not-a-Conservative-Party over a cliff.
If they scrapped the Net Zero insanity and the price of energy was reduced, we would stand a chance of turning things around. But they won’t: the Blob and the Uni-Party are fully signed up to UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 and that requires the destruction of our industrial base.
Reply The Conservative party has made clear the UK needs a big change of energy policy and stated the net zero targets are unrealistic.
June 6, 2025
Reply to reply:
No, the Conservative Party has done no such thing. Badenough has made a few announcements along those lines, but yesterday James Cleverly made it very clear that he doesn’t agree.
As with every other policy, the Party is fundamentally split between the recognisably-Conservative and the LibCons.
Reply Cleverly does not speak for the party. The Leader and the Shadow Chancellor have both set out the need for cheaper energy with fossil fuels in the mix and no to the 2050 net zero target
June 6, 2025
Reply to reply. I’m sure you are correct, but as an interested but casual observer that’s not the impression I got looking at the headlines. The Tories’ comms aren’t working well, if they want to portray themselves as anti net zero.
June 6, 2025
reply to reply… ‘The (Party) Leader and the Shadow Chancellor have both set out the need for cheaper energy with fossil fuels in the mix and no to the 2050 net zero target’.
About time after all those years of sitting on bum cheeks avoiding the blindingly obvious need for YES decision on nuclear. So the current (very temporary) pair above recognize need but thats as far as it goes.
Can, road, kicked …..
June 6, 2025
Listening to Badenoch just now, I’m willng to hear more.
Nothing much (good) is going to happen during this Parliament and she has time to form detailed, workable policies to offer the electorate (wouldn’t that make a change). A week in politics is a very long time (as Nigel can confirm) and four years is an eternity. Kemi’s biggest problem is going to be sorting out the Lib Dems in her MP ranks and allowing real conservatives to stand in the next election (and not ex-SPAD stooges appointed by CPHQ). Love her or hate her, Kemi is the person in the hot seat and the one who has to lead the Conservatives back in from the wilderness. It’s the Last Chance Saloon and I hope they don’t screw it up.
June 6, 2025
But they have real concrete policies to ‘review’ the ECHRs and Net-Zero targets !!!
June 6, 2025
I have no idea what choices we will have in four years time Glen. Maybe Kemi will have a set of carefully worked out policies that make very good sense or maybe the Tory Party will have had another coup by then. Maybe Nigel Farage will have actually managed to gather a group of people capable of running the country or maybe he will just decide he doesn’t want to be PM anymore and disappear. Keir Starmer might even still be PM!
Who knows? I certainly don’t. So I will watch closely and pray that when the time does come, that there is someone who looks like they can actually fix our broken country (which even if it isn’t broken now – it most certainly will be be by then at the rate we are going!)
June 10, 2025
Words used when not in power, zero to negative credibility. There is no point listening to the LibLabCon. Its actions that count and that rules out the all the legacy parties. Only Labour have a chance because of the ability to action, they are currently burning all bridges with the legacy population in favour a new world order,
June 6, 2025
Some of the Conservative party Sir John. Some are contradicting that message.
Who knows who the leader will be next time the Conservatives have any influence.
Reply The Conservatives as the official Opposition and Reform both have influence now. The government is backing down over pensioner fuel allowances and will have to change on other issues.
June 6, 2025
reply to reply …only due to the MPs who escaped rejection at present. Crystal ball gaze and consider what group’s policies will hold sway in 4 years time.
June 6, 2025
I would say that the government is backing down over Pension fuel allowances due to the doorsteps Sir John, not Conservative influence which I am afraid has been reduced to stopping fare dodgers (zero tolerance to crime being a good thing but if this is the limit of your impact as a party…….)
June 6, 2025
This government will do nothing to reduce expenditure or the national debt until the bond vigilantes step in then they will reach for the printing press.
Very soon we will look like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.
Cutting spending jeans reducing their client state and reducing immigration their voters base
The problem is the immigrants are beginning to form their own political parties which although far right as 2TK likes to call us, he wouldn’t dare call them out as they are a protected species.
This country is heading for a very serious reset and it’s not the one envisaged by the UN, WEF.
June 6, 2025
It appears another ship carrying 2200 cars, 800 EVs has caught fire and been abandoned. Probably won’t be reported by MSM because it doesn’t fit the narrative. Some insurers are refusing cover if EVs are kept in garages
Where is the reporting on this.
June 6, 2025
Will neighbours get concerned about street parking when an EV parks for overnight next to your car?
How to quickly evacuate with a car in flames next to it…
June 6, 2025
I wouldn’t want my house within a 100 yards of a EV charger …..but they’re changing the rules every day
June 6, 2025
@Ian. +1. The demographic projections are extraordinary, if they are to be believed. A white minority in 40 years, with a significant percentage being of a non-christian background, would be a profound change in our society.
Even those encouraging it recognise that social change on this scale and at this speed is very unlikely to roll out smoothly. At the same time we are experiencing an accelerating economic decline. And finally AI is advancing so fast, with the potential to hugely disrupt the employment market within the next 10 years.
Look back in history and where do you find a combination of massive rapid social change combined with economic decline and rising mass unemployment producing peace and contentment?
June 6, 2025
Prof David Betz, Prof of War Studies at Kings College, has been featured on several right-of-centre podcasts recently warning that the UK has all the conditions in place for a civil war, along ethnic/sectarian lines.
June 6, 2025
We are told the introduction of AI will result in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, yet at the same time, we need to import foreign workers to fix the falling birth rate. Maybe it’s time to start measuring GDP by headcount. I don’t see a problem in reducing the UK’s population if it increases our standard of living. This country has lived on cheap labour for too long.
June 6, 2025
The number of those above the retirement age is projected to keep increasing. Those people will expect a state pension, access to the NHS and social care if needed. Who will fund all that if the overall population is reduced (meaning a significant reduction in those of working age)?
June 7, 2025
Peter, these people have already paid well over 30 years of National Insurance contributions and paid fortunes in income tax.
Their pension isn’t a benefit.
They are entitled to NHS care.
And as a back up we have record levels of immigration.
If they are mainly high earning doctors and engineers like we are told, then the tax revenues will easily cover the needs of our aging population.
June 7, 2025
AI will fund people’s retirement. Put a tax on robots. People will need to work fewer hours, and productivity will increase as AI can work 24/7 for no wages, and they don’t go on strike.
June 6, 2025
@Wanderer – London made its quota a few years back – hence the reason it is a no go area for the indigenous population
June 6, 2025
+1 and house prices dropping like a stone.
June 6, 2025
Rome – just before it fell.
The rate of change will increase – it will not be 40 years but within our lifetime that we are required to wear the burka.
June 6, 2025
An excellent and well-thought out post from Sir John, giving Rachel Reeves many good suggestions for improving the nation’s finances.
The lady could do worse than approaching SJR and, dare I say it, offering a position as a SPAD.
June 6, 2025
I agree.
June 6, 2025
🤯 like making da Vinci the pupil of Tracy Emin.
June 6, 2025
Fiscal responsibility is a meaningless unmeasurable phrase that politicians churn out ad nauseam thinking the public are interested. They are not especially when every politician local and national only wants more spending and so do voters. Reform is only gaining traction because voters are utterly fed up with being lied to by the mainstream party’s.
We have seen for decades maybe for ever greasy pole politicians with zero knowledge of people management/business improvement etc principles running departments in name only allowing an inward looking Civil Service untroubled by any possibility of poor performance sanctions look after themselves and we see the results.
The public sector ‘broken’ inefficient/wasteful.
Despite the rhetoric nothing will change. You mentioned Covid, a metaphor for the endemic rot in our systems.
June 6, 2025
Voters DO NOT WANT MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING!
Who are you? Starmer?
June 6, 2025
Fiscal responsibility is not going to happen with this crowd.
Meanwhile, Musk calls for Trump’s impeachment
&
Reform chairman Zia Yusuf resigns.
June 6, 2025
Your first paragraph sums it it perfectly JR, that is why we have so much debt, and all Party leaders agreed to this expenditure at the time, some wanting even more !
Now they complain having had 5 years of hindsight !
As my daughters have said (now more often) what is the point of striving, planning and saving to secure your financial future, when most of it will be taken away in taxation one way or another, spend it as you get it and enjoy yourself.
I see it is being reported that now many people are refusing promotion to jobs paying over £100,000 because of the huge tax implications etc. Just shows what a crazy World our Politicians have made for us.
June 6, 2025
Doctors, dentists, specialists…what was a glass ceiling for females now a £100k income tax ceiling for all.
June 6, 2025
Absolutely do not expand your one-man business to take on employees. The machinery of state is poised to make your life a misery.
June 6, 2025
nothing much new in that I understand? Years of Tories eased Corporation taxes, but made tiny business lives a misery. Even VAT registration encouraged cash dealing.
June 6, 2025
Why would people not take the promotion, the associated pay rise, and if they think the extra take home isn’t worth it, put the extra into their pension?
June 6, 2025
What is fiscally responsible about handing the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. Then paying them £3.5 Billion for the privilege. (many commentators on this deal think the bill could 10 times higher)
June 6, 2025
Importing taxpayer subsidised poverty while allowing so many of our own to lie idle on benefits and sickness payments is not sustainable and laces an unfair burden on the minority of net contributors now and in the future (paying back debt incurred). With foreigners picking up £144 billion a year in benefits (plus health and education spending) and an annual deficit of £151 billion some easy decisions can be made.
Reducing the deficit should not reduce the tax take, let’s run a surplus but net zero costs us quite a bit so there are savings to be made there plus the productivity gains possible within government and Bank of England losses could be stemmed.
So there is scope to run a surplus and cut taxes.
June 6, 2025
Many of the new houses in my area have been allocated to foreign incomers and people moved away from the Cities. Local people on the waiting lists have been overlooked for the 10% of social housing built on the new estates.
June 6, 2025
Redistribution of the voting population?
June 6, 2025
Please, no more reminders of the monstrous over-reaction to covid by the establishment – They keep reminding us, even now, that there is more to come, and they probably know this for good reasons.
The government at the time just threw money in all directions, making certain people and certain companies very thankful for their lack of discipline. I don’t see that anything has improved under this government – they still spend our money like thieves suddenly rich, with no concern for what it is costing us.
There are plenty of things HMG could do to stabilise our economy, but none of it fits in with the destructive waste demanded by Net0. We really should stop expecting better things when it is clear that any response to our problems is theatre, play-acting and insubstantial.
June 6, 2025
June 6, 2025
@BH. I saw an interesting interview Tucker Carlson did with Senator Ron Johnstone (a mine of information on the US government finances).
The Senator made the point that the US has never recovered from the jump in spending triggered by Covid. The unprecedented levels have become precedented. It became acceptable to throw huge amounts of money around, and there seems to be no going back. Largesse is empowering and enriching, for a powerful minority.
June 6, 2025
@Wanderer +1
June 6, 2025
Germany spent 1.1 Trillion Pounds Sterling on Covid (US spent 3.4 Trillion in Pounds Sterling on Covid).
UK spent 365 billion Pounds Sterling on Covid.
So man for man Germany spent at least double that of UK.
So the UK wasn’t the only country who spent loads.
Most Western countries did. Because no-one really knew what was going on.
People who bang on about Covid bill are talking from their heads like robots. No-one is perfect. Boris Johnson was doing the best he could in challenging situation (he even got really ill during Covid – remember?!).
June 6, 2025
Some sad joke:
He could have done better and got experts that were not so influenced by big pharma.
He was deceived by alleged experts that should have known better. Even then it was all badly managed. there was a u-tube out that showed how false the whole thing was at the time. Boris along with other leaders was on a photo shoot, with all wearing masks — After the pictures were taken all masks came off. That was enough to prove what a deceit it all was.
Prior to covid we had a very workable solution for handling bad attacks of flu-like ailments – The experts immediately threw these tried and tested methods out of the window and made thing up from scratch as they went on without any science to justify their actions.
June 6, 2025
Like I said, Germany spent twice what UK spent per person on Covid.
Looks like you’re dreaming of Utopia. Good luck!
June 7, 2025
No, not Utopia. Sounds to me like he’s dreaming of Sweden.
Sweden used OUR Pandemic Plan, the one we were following until Johnson binned it. It had very few restrictions in place; didn’t wreck the economy and had a better health outcome than the western nations (inc the UK) which went full-on Totalitarian.
There is very good evidence that the western reaction to Covid was being orchestrated by American Military Agencies. The 5 Eyes and NATO countries moved in lockstep imposing restrictions and rolling out the experimental gene therapies.
Sweden didn’t: at the time, Sweden was in the EU but NOT in NATO.
June 7, 2025
@Donna
@Donna,
Sweden’s total Covid spend per person was 2/3 that of UK’s. With UK’s 1/2, per person, of Germany’s.
So, sure, Sweden did a bit better than the UK. But only by 1/3. And it’s not as if they knew strongly what they were doing. It was gambling to a degree. More like at the horse races than being a clever investor in the stock market (as no-one had a clue about Covid – it was something quite new).
So I think you’re being harsh on the UK’s politicians when they had little to go on and there are so many other issues that have to be sorted now – and also for us to have creative vision for the future instead of just reacting to everything in the moment.
June 6, 2025
Sir John
Everyone involved in this Parliament and the previous ones this century have been afraid of even their own shadows, they have created imbalances in the economy, taxes and democracy. So rather than address the problems we all face, with an eye on the general election they kick things into the long grass – so compounding the issues.
MP’s no longer serve; they do what their master tells them to do and that is not the electorate.
Today Davy Russell says he will work every single day to put his community first – we know that is a lie tomorrow he will put his leader and party above everything else. The deceit in Government and Parliament knows no bounds.
June 6, 2025
Sir John
Yesterday we saw the Media pontificate that there have been recent calls for the European nations involved to step up and play their part in NATO with a commitment to spend 5% of GDP on defence.
In the usual EU fudge that is to mean just 3.5% of GDP on men and equipment etc, with 1.5% improving infrastructure roads, railways. So, we now know why 2TK and Rachael from complaints made a big deal about spending money on reintroducing their blocked plans for trams and trains – that’s the extra 1.5% sorted.
Still 5% or 3.5% of our current zero GDP is still nothing – so a pat on the back the job has been done defence spending met!
June 6, 2025
How much should Ireland be paying for their Nato protections and investments in protection based on their GDP? Why isn’t the UK government starting there to get a fair share from them? I believe other EU nations are enjoying the protections without providing anything.
June 6, 2025
@a-tracy – the the EU State of the Irish Republic is not part of NATO, so yes for all intense and purpose it gets a free ride. As you suspect and as Trump has hinted there are to many ‘freeloaders’
The USA pays around $997billion dollars which is 66% of all NATO Funding. EU population 449.7 million, USA 347 million. The EU only has Russia on its eastern flank that is considered a threat, while the USA is defending through the NATO treaty the EU, it has to contend with its western threat of China which is outside of any backup or cooperation of NATO.
So it seems reasonable Europe should provide a proportion defence in NATO, which on population comparisons alone the EU’s funding of NATO should be somewhere North of 70%. EU contribution to Nato in monetary terms is just $485 billion, with the smaller more more stretched USA on $997billion.
The EU as usual is playing the political game of undermining everyone else as long as it benefits them. So when others say enough is enough they shouldn’t be surprised
June 6, 2025
How much should Ukraine be paying for their NATO ‘protection’?
When did NATO outgrow itself – protecting preferred countries?
When did NATO abandon defence in favour of attack? Rutte claimed yesterday it was the most ‘powerful alliance of all time – more powerful that the ‘Roman Empire and ‘the Napoleon Empire’ – neither known for their defence.
If you add in ‘donations to Ukraine’ Britain meets the 5% mark on defence spending.
June 7, 2025
+1 LA. I was recently asked to participate in a fundraiser “for Ukraine” (by which they they meant the western, NATO-wannabee part of it). I declined, as a lot of my taxes have disappeared there already, without anyone asking me.
If I’d been asked I would have said spend that money here or give it back to taxpayers, if all you can find to spend it on is 1500 miles away in a conflict we should have nothing to do with.
June 6, 2025
JR “I have long argued for a big reduction in Bank of England losses.” We heard you, your own party wouldn’t listen, what chance is there that Labour will listen?
June 6, 2025
The Russian Ambassador to the UK, Andrei Kelin, pointed the finger at the UK yesterday when he said Ukraine must have had assistance in the weekend’s Ukraine drone attacks.
“This kind of attack involves, of course, provision of very high technology, so-called geospaced data, which only can be done by those who have it in possession. And this is London and Washington”
Of course, the Russians will be gobsmacked at losing about half of the airborne component of their nuclear triad to the latest Ukraine spectacular. There will be fewer incidents of Russian Tu-bombers probing our airspace near RAF Lossiemouth as a result.
Expect some serious sabotage here shortly – more than a few electricity substations catching fire
June 6, 2025
A bear which is prodded usually reacts.
June 6, 2025
SG :
The Russians don’t need to organise sabotage. The invited invasion of “strangers” from across the Channel and the implementation of the Net Zero Strategy to destroy our energy, economy and military capability will do all the damage they seek. We’re on the path to self-destruction.
June 7, 2025
Have you taken your medication today?
June 7, 2025
Very poor comment SG
June 6, 2025
Judging from the scheduled bombing of Ukraine overnight (this is not the retaliation for the terrorist attacks in Russia) they don’t seem to be short of SU bombers. However the SALT treaty where these bombers are kept in the open so that the other side can see where they are at all times, is wobbling. Simplicius points out that some of the pictures showing ‘destroyed’ aircraft have been doctored. The Russian Defence Force states that no aircraft have been destroyed but 5 have been damaged, 3 badly.
Look as if Trump is withdrawing the USA from supporting Ukraine.
Supporting a terrorist organization is a very serious thing to do. The British Government need to take advice,
June 6, 2025
The Russian Ambassador should pass on his admiration and warn Putin that the gentle peaceful Brits can become very angry destructive clever Bears to make theirs seem like cuddly toys.
June 7, 2025
@SG. They’ve been remarkably restrained. I can’t think the US would be so tolerant if Russians were guiding missiles into the States launched from a third country.
If the Middle East war escalates we may well see missiles targeted at close US allies or US forces in the region. Again, if those firing get Chinese/Russian help, would the US widen the conflict or just sit back and gnash its teeth?
June 6, 2025
I haven’t seen any fiscal tax policy from either the tories nor labour apart from; tax they high and tax them as much as possible without them knowing
June 6, 2025
The benefits agency needs to become the job agency and align people with work that they can do with their skills, put mental health patients on courses and help them to help other people back into work quickly, if they spend more than three months out of work their anxiety doubles with every quarter until they’re incapable of reentering the workforce.
The UK needs to stop this, we can’t put people into hospitals and military because it will displace paid roles, no it won’t it will provide a free training ground and free up nurses time to nurse instead of carry lunch trays around, taking calls from patient families to pass on news that should be put in the system, the IT system in hospitals is barely there, notes are spoken in to the system on ward rounds so details aren’t passed from one shift to another properly, the use of the highest paid nurse to take phone calls and bring food around is the most stupid thing I’ve seen. Support workers wearing lilac do all the heavy lifting.
June 6, 2025
Sir John, I love your sense of humour! Fiscal responsibility and the Labour Government, not a chance. The UK is being squeezed by too high tax rates, uncontrolled government spending and the careless attitude of our MPs.
Starmer, Reeves, and Rayner have no clue when it comes to the economy, but it seems neither did the previous government. We now have Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt telling us how to run the UK, yet both are responsible for the mess we are in today. What a shame they did not follow their own advice when it could have made a difference. All you suggest is excellent and good common sense, but we have a government detached from reality. The Conservative government would not listen to you, so there is no hope that Labour will. But keep fighting the battle, and maybe Kemi or Nigel will listen at some point.
June 6, 2025
“Rachel Reeves claims fiscal responsibility but does the opposite….”
Of course. Socialism depends upon making and keeping people poor. Hence the use by the uniparty of mass legal and illegal immigration and Net Zero to impoverish the country and make us miltarily and economically weak. Never mind rule by the EU they want us to be ruled by the Russian and Chinese controlled ICC & UN.
June 6, 2025
Elon Musk great example why you shouldn’t cosy up with Trump.
The UK is now Trump’s puppy dog instead of being a lion – and a puppy dog until he finds an argument with the UK and then trample all over.
June 6, 2025
The utter lunacy of Steve Bannon and Trump’s MAGA:
‘Steve Bannon has called for Donald Trump to deport “illegal alien” Elon Musk and seize SpaceX with immediate effect.’
June 6, 2025
Ban on is a neo-con. Did you not know?
Both Trump and Musk are right in various ways. The public spat is very regrettable.
I think Musk might take SpaceX etc to Russia.
June 7, 2025
I hope they can patch up the relationship. Trump is slipping back towards a Trump1.0 administration, where the deep state kept a low profile and was not damaged. It needs to be harried, and the ground laid for a JD Vance Presidency to continue the work. Elon was shining a light on the corruption of the system (albeit the actual savings were small in relation to the federal budget).