Time was when in Opposition Labour went to town on Conservative economic policy if the IMF, OECD, World Bank or OBR made a bad forecast for the UK. They treated it as if it were the outcome and blamed the government. Sometimes the forecasts were obviously wrong but it was lese majeste to claim to know better than a world body.
Scroll on to yesterday. The OECD said UK inflation will remain high by G20 standards- probably right. UK growth will be disappointing this year and next but a bit higher in 2027- could be optimistic about 2027. What was the Chancellor’s response? The UK was doing better because of a small upward revision for growth this year. .She ignored the worse forecasts for inflation and growth next year. She did not announce any reduction in her targets which on OECD forecasts she will miss.
I have no problem with her disagreeing with the OECD but only if there is good reason to find them wrong. When I look at all the policies she is pursuing, as I explained before and when they were introduced, the policies are bound to increase costs and prices and to reduce output and growth. So why expect a better outcome?
Higher taxes on business and jobs destroy work and growth. Large public sector pay awards with no productivity clauses raise costs and increase state borrowing . Selling bonds at a loss and sending the taxpayer the bill contracts credit and private sector activity. Stopping grants to farmers and taxing family farms means less UK food production. Buying renewable electricity at high guaranteed prices with subsidies keeps energy prices high and closes factories.Bans on new oil and gas an on petrol car manufacture literally destroy potential output. And the rest I have set out many times.
How does she think she will get extra growth? 1 From a housebuilding boom with a 50% increase in output. So far with a quarter of this Parliament gone despite her planning changes housing starts are down, making it all but impossible to hit the 5 year target. We were not short of permissions but short of builders and buyers. 2 From increased public investment which is now constrained by fiscal rules and a shortage of oven ready good projects. 3 From green jobs which turn out to be mainly in China as we import their solar panels, batteries and turbines.
There is no workable growth plan. If she goes for another budget of more spending in an overmanned public sector and yet higher taxes on wealth creators, property and business it could be the OECD are wrong again by being too optimistic.
September 24, 2025
Good morning.
I was listening to an economic commentator (I refuse to call them experts) on a podcast yesterday about the UK economy. It made for grim listening. Too much of our economy is under State control, one way or another. With too many people claiming various benefits, some non-UK citizens, I honestly cannot see our way out of this.
I can only see an end to the State Pension and serious curtailing of benefits plus the selling off of the NHS as the only solution.
Reply Both extreme solutions that people will not back. There are plenty of much easier cuts to get spending under control, as I have set out.
September 24, 2025
The only growth sector is immigration. Be it direct costs, lawyers fees, so called charity payments etc.
If these costs are removed we are in recession.
Per capita has shrunk miserably as the country is flooded with non productive immigrants without a corresponding ruse in output.
Trump was 109% correct with his analysis. Why can’t our clowns see it. I’ll tell you , it’s because they’re following the UN/WEF directives on mass immigration. It can no longer be waved off as a conspiracy theory. Yes, there is a Uniparty.
September 24, 2025
Indeed amazing how many people have jumped up to criticise his comment are paracetamol. I have no Idea if he is wrong on this but I am sure he has been told of some significant evidence. He now has very good people at the top of his medical team. Plus he has a history of being rather correct. This on Sadiq Kahn, on UK immigration destroying the country from the inside, on the Climate Scam, on Windfarms on Germany becoming too dependent on Russian gas, on the UN…
So far we have had statements rubbishing his paracetamol comments from Wes Streeting, Julia Hartley Brewer the NHS and even the MHRA:- “MHRA confirms taking paracetamol during pregnancy remains safe and there is no evidence it causes autism in children”.
This the MHRA (largely funded by big pharma) who idiotically pushed the experimental Covid “Vaccines” at children, pregnant women, the young and people who had had Covid already. This has truly disastrous results which they have not even admitted yet. No evidence they say. I rather doubt if Trump’s advisors had “no evidence”.
Note Trump himself did says that it might need to be taken even in pregnancy for high fevers on medical advise so even he himself did not rule it out completely!
September 24, 2025
I agree.
Their priority is to “level down” the UK by importing millions from the 3rd world, who will be (at best) low-wage workers and ( benefit takers ed) all their lives. They will transfer regular remittances to their native countries, sucking more money out of this country’s economy.
September 24, 2025
Donna. I agree. What I would like to know is where is all the money to come from to pay the indigenous population and the army of scrounges when our manufacturing has disappeared, financial services?
September 24, 2025
Perhaps as many as 10 UK tax payers just to cover the hotel, legal costs, medical costs, dental costs, translation costs, taxi costs, benefits bill for each migrant! Most doom loop lunacy from Reeves!
September 24, 2025
Dissolution of the quangos would be a good place to start – but that needs a different government.
September 24, 2025
@ Oldtimer – do you have any quango in mind whose functions you would welcome being discontinued with what effect or is your call just a form of dog whistle politics without substance?
September 25, 2025
The Climate Change Committee would be a good place to start.
September 24, 2025
I am no fan of Greta disciple Gove but he was right when he said “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts with organisations with acronyms saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong.”
The dire MHRA, OEDC, BoE, the C for CC and all the rest.
He is usually totally misquoted as “We have had enough of experts” if the experts are honest and competent we certainly need them! But not people like the Classics Graduates who head up the C for CC!
September 24, 2025
Rather like ‘united’ Nations (UN) which are far from united.
September 24, 2025
Sir John, you reply pointing out savings that can be made and these should certainly be pursued. However as a State we need to reduce benefit spending at some point. No economy can continue with 23% of working age population being given hand-outs not to work. That 23% figure has also been rising for decades. At what stage does the system break?
Reply Yes of course we need to cut total cost of benefit spending . I have set out many times how government can get more people into work and off benefits based on the detailed and excellent remedies of the CSJ and Iain Duncan Smith. Yesterday I set out how to stop illegal migrants coming here and receiving major public spending support.
September 24, 2025
The chancellor and the Labour government in general are doing all they can to degrade our economic prospects. The main driver of economic decline is the crippling cost of energy. That cost is being funded by increased borrowing needed to pay for social costs driven ever higher by unemployment, unsupported immigration and importation of the most basic energy supplies, including electricity from continental Europe.
We have an almost unique advantage as a nation. We sit on energy sources sufficient for our total national needs and spare capacity we could export, if we were allowed to. We host the international language of commerce and learning and enjoy a benign climate that allows risk free activities and work environment. Our store of technical expertise is second to none, along with our commercial capabilities when they are allowed to be deployed.
None of that matters unfortunately, because the government is focused on international priorities that prevent them utilizing any of the UKs natural advantages.
Net Zero plus the UN’s protocol of assisting migration, both of which were signed into law by Theresa May are crippling the nation.
We are all asking why do our political class continue to destroy the nation by policy set out by international bodies with no interest in the UK’s pain or needs?
September 24, 2025
Very well put.
As discussed yesterday, the objective of this government NOT what they say it is. I know it’s hard to believe our own democratically elected government is trying to damage our nation. Join up the dots, take a clear eyed look at what is happening, facts not words, see what 2TK et al are really doing.
September 24, 2025
Many within the British Establishment have, for decades, supported the objective of creating a “Rules-Based Order” and One World Government.
Two-Tier is turbo-charging the aim.
September 24, 2025
RE :
Agreed.
For Mrs. May I would also add the sabotaging of Brexit. There is no way I would consider voting Conservative whilst Mrs. May is still a member of the party.
September 24, 2025
@ Original Richard “..whilst Mrs. May is still a member of the party” and of good standing you might have added.
Kemi would do well to use the party conference to do a number on May taking her example from Krushchev on Stalin.
Reply Mrs May does not influence current policy. There is no basis for the Conservatives to expel her which would be a mean minded distraction from their important constitutional duty to criticise the government for its many errors.
September 24, 2025
reply to reply…isn’t doing the opposite (as a PM )to Conservative policy sufficient grounds?
Reply When she did I and the other antis were a minority.
September 24, 2025
Reply to Reply : Mrs. May is still making HoL speeches in support of Net Zero (obviously) on behalf of the Conservative Party. I did not suggest the Conservative Party expels her but rather that since she feels she can represent the Conservative Party in supporting Net Zero in the HoL there must still be considerable support for Net Zero within the Conservative Party and hence I will not be voting Conservative. I think it would be beneficial to the Conservative Party if Mrs. May were to willingly transfer her allegiance to another party more suited to her ideas on Brexit, immigration and Net Zero. It would give the Conservative Party a better chance of re-election at the next GE.
Reply Net zero is not official Conservative party policy. The leader has made it clear the 2050 target is unrealistic and has backed full exploitation of UK oil and gas. Mrs May as a backbench peer can say what she likes.
September 24, 2025
Reply to reply If net zero by 2050 is not Conservative policy then the opposite must be true. If Theresa May, who is listed as Conservative, were a backbench Conservative MP and consistently gave speeches opposing Conservative policy would she be allowed to remain on the Conservative benches?
Reply Probably. I disagreed with a lot of government policies and attitudes in the last Parliament.
September 24, 2025
Reply to reply : You are of course correct that Mrs. May as a backbench peer is entitled to say what she likes. Kemi Badenoch has said that Net Zero by 2050 is impossible and expensive wasted effort since we only emit 1% of anthropogenic emissions and especially if no-one else is following our lead. But not that the aim of finally achieving Net Zero itself is wrong, which it is. Not only does CO2 not cause a climate crisis, it is the gas of life and with no CO2, or less than 150ppm, plants and hence life on the planet cannot survive. For the last 150m years CO2 has been on a steady decline. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, believes this is due to shellfish taking up the CO2 to make their shells and if we do not emit CO2 into the atmosphere through burning fossil fuels CO2 will eventually decline to below the 150ppm needed for life on the planet to survive.
September 24, 2025
What is the point of having a target for inflation? A few weeks ago, interests rates were cut. If I understand right, the present level is nearly double the target.
September 24, 2025
words left out ed
The only way out of this is to expand manufacturing and exports. But Trump has just found a way to get British pharma companies (one of our manufacturing strengths) to defer investment here – and shift it to America. We should oppose this and offer alternative incentives, serviced life science parks, a better quality of life etc
Exporting services – particularly fintech services – is difficult, despite Maggie’s assertions to the contrary. Too many other countries can do services too.
We need a twin deficits reduction strategy. Before the IMF impose it on us anyway. There’s nothing left to sell off.
September 24, 2025
SG: “The only way out of this is to expand manufacturing and exports.”
This is not feasible whilst we have the de-industrialisation policy of Net Zero as law. Not only does Net Zero make our energy far more expensive the Labour/NESO mission “Clear Power 2030” actually requires energy rationing by 2030 euphemistically called “Demand Side Response” (DSR) of between 20% to 40% of peak demand depending upon how much power we can buy from the EU via the interconnectors.
September 24, 2025
President Trump has just introduced a massive disincentive for companies to move operations of any sort to the USA. He has imposed a $100,000 (no, that is not a typo) on each H1-B visa application. In response, it is reported that the UK government is considered dropping to zero the fee for certain work visas to attract the best global talent to the UK. Companies will go where its easy to attract and retain talent, as it is talent that makes money for them.
September 24, 2025
They are implementing UN Agenda 21/2030 and the WEF’s policies and are deliberately driving the economy over a cliff.
You cannot deflect Communists from attempting to implementing communism by reason.
September 24, 2025
@Donna – the plan, and they will stick to it. Done a lot in 12 months, guess what will happen in the next 48 months. All of our down ticks just confirm to them the plan is working.
September 24, 2025
Donna
Which is why they are obsessed with Nasty Nigel, are ‘reclaiming ‘ the Union flag from the ‘hard right’ and bad mouth, Trump and Reform UK at every opportunity.
September 24, 2025
The Chancellor is running up a down escalator and she is running out of breath already.
The running upwards are her sporadic growth projects and the downward escalator is the futility of those projects along with an unproductive public sector and an enormous and abused welfare system.
The situation would be a joke if it were not so serious.
September 24, 2025
‘She ignored the worse forecasts for inflation and growth next year. ‘
Rachel from Complaints has to stick with the fairy tale …..growth, house building, taxing the rich etc while the economic car crash is rushing to the scene of the collision.
September 24, 2025
@Mickey Taking – check out the organisation and its people advising her, pushing her, writing her budget, against them she is the safe bet until the whole crowd is gone.
September 24, 2025
“Buying renewable electricity at high guaranteed prices with subsidies keeps energy prices high and closes factories”
Ahem….
Almost a quarter of the average energy bill in 2024 was funding corporate profits. About 25% of the average energy bill went to the major electricity generators, networks and household suppliers. Energy networks that distribute gas and electricity to the UK’s homes and businesses had a profit margin of 55% between 2020 and 2024 – compared with a FTSE 350 average of 14%. That’s why energy costs are so high here.
Blaming renewable energy for the high costs of electricity here demonstrably wrong. But, it’s music to Trump’s ears. America is now the world’s largest exporter of fossil fuels. He would say that, wouldn’t he?
Reply Wrong again. These are regulated utilities bidding in a competitive market. Their profit margins are much lower than you imagine. Why deny the high guaranteed prices for wind energy, and the extensive grid and back up costs?
September 24, 2025
We are paying a fortune for NO ENERGY when the windmills have to be switched off.
And we are paying a fortune for imported energy when the windmills aren’t turning because there’s no wind.
Unreliable, intermittent energy is expensive energy.
September 24, 2025
Vastly more grid investment need to connect up thousands of dispersed wind farms and the back up needed than to connect up one large fossil fuel or nuclear generator. Plus these connections will usually operate at under 30% of capacity thus costing even more in capital investment!
September 24, 2025
SG – how wrong can you get. Another wind-up? From the Renewable Energy Foundation, the total cost of five direct and five indirect subsidies to the renewable electricity sector in the United Kingdom is costing the Taxpayer £220 billion (in 2024 prices) per year, equivalent to nearly £8,000 per household. 40% of its total cost of electricity supply in the United Kingdom is paid for by Taxpayer Subsidies.
Much of the UK Taxpayer money is going to support Foreign Regimes that are outside of the UK’s taxable domain, for it never to come back, never feed the UK economy and certainly never taxed in the UK.
If renewables were so good why do they even need a single £1, 10 different sets of subsidies, from the Taxpayer, why don’t they just sell their energy on the open market and compete like a normal industry.
September 24, 2025
They cannot as they are not remotely competitive, so the market has to be rigged or they would not exist other than in a few special circumstances where grid connection is too expensive!
September 24, 2025
If only we had stuck with Prime Minister Truss and her Chancellor Kwasi Karteng.
It is unlikely we would be worse off than we are now and we may well be better off through trying a different approach.
The consensus among group thinkers is not usually correct.
Time to start seriously modelling taking less in tax and spending less on the public sector.
September 24, 2025
@Narrow Shoulders – the Socialist State fought them and won. All the fault lines attributed to them have been shown to be in place and would have happened regardless. There only weakness, was because there was and is a need to urgently, desperately urgent need to address the imbedded socialist orthodoxy that is setup to destroy the Country, meant the presentation was neglected for the sake of getting on with it. Everything it was suggested was the outcome of them gaining office has tripled and more to be worse with the shower now running our Parliament
September 24, 2025
Since when have City bond traders been any part of the “Socialist State”?
September 24, 2025
@PP – quoting @Original Richard, lower down “the Governor of the Bank of England, Mr. Bailey, when at Cambridge (History) chaired the university’s branch of the Fabian Society.” The collapse was instigated before the leader of the Conservatives was elected. The Society is a hot bed of Socialist something they are proud of the Governer of the BoE is the principal trader of these bonds
September 24, 2025
The BoE largely to blame and surely Sunak and his supporters. Sunak whose insane lockdowns and net harm vaccine plans borrowed and spent £400 billion doing huge net harm! Has he said sorry for misleading the house on vaccine safely yet?
September 24, 2025
The Chancellor should be reminded of that truism – “If you keep on doing the same thing and expect a different result then that is not just illogical, one’s sanity must surely be suspect.”
Labour have failed to curtail their spending and now we must pay the price, once again, of their extravagance, and it’s not as though that extravagant spending was well invested for some return – far from it!
Why are socialists so inept when it comes to handling finances – it wasn’t so long ago that the labour party had to be bailed out by the unions or face bankruptcy.
September 24, 2025
I do wish you were still my MP Sir John.
September 24, 2025
amen to that, and quite a few thousand that live here.
September 24, 2025
All Reeves has to do is cut all Quango budgets by 50%, which saves over £150 billion. That fills the black hole and leaves some space to cut taxes.
But will she do it? Not a chance, so the UK economy will go over a cliff.
September 24, 2025
Sir John
To much is made about House Building. It clearly electioneering by those that no nothing.
All the major UK House Builders have at least 10years of Land secured for development ahead of them, they would be naive not to be in that position. The hold back is the state of the economy. You don’t build unless you can sell for ‘top dollar’ the need is to maximise profits. It would be irresponsible not to do so as for starters the next chunk of land needed for what is termed your ‘Land Bank’ will cost infinitely more than the last.
They other grey area is the cost of building materials the source of which has moved into foreign hands which along with the covid spell forced prices up well over 30% in the last couple of years. Then add in the war on the self-employed, as that is what most site workers are and the threatened war to come as pontificated by those Marxist now embedded in Government.
A builder is not going to build unless there is profit, it’s not a giveaway industry. That said the last thing the Taxpayer needs is being forced to subsidies the building industry with forced discounts on house buying, the Country has been that route and it is twice as expensive as having a government simply managing expenditure and creating an economy.
September 24, 2025
So as to not loose site of the pain that subsidies and giveaways create. The Taxpayer dumps bucket loads of cash on foreign energy companies for UK wealth to depart the Country. The Taxpayer dumps bucket loads of cash on foreign car producers for UK wealth to depart.
Money being spent in the UK circulates in the UK and feeds itself, money being forced out of the Country depletes the Nations Wealth and destroys its future as there is no money to fund it.
September 24, 2025
Since socialism depends upon making and keeping people poor, for the Far Left currently in power we ARE hitting our economic targets. Their Net Zero Strategy is the perfect vehicle to cause de-industrialisation and impoverishment and make us dependent upon imports and unable to defend ourselves. Coupled of course with an invasion of poor migrants. This should not come as a surprise. Mr. Starmer, before he became an MP, served on the executive committee of the Fabian Society, a far left movement, whose logo is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. And according to Wikipedia, the Governor of the Bank of England, Mr. Bailey, when at Cambridge (History) chaired the university’s branch of the Fabian Society.
September 24, 2025
You note and ask “…the policies are bound to increase costs and prices and to reduce output and growth. So why expect a better outcome?”, perhaps because failing to articulate fanciful expectations would require the Chancellor to repudiate all her past actions, maladroit and inchoate as they have been.
Of course, Wrecker Reeves may be an adherent of Thomas Gray’s line “Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise”.