EU rules for debts and deficits

The Chancellor is calling for ideas on what new fiscal rules should be applied to the UK economy as it seeks to recover from the pandemic shock.

One of the surprises in the official figures released with the budget was to see the traditional table showing the next five years figures against the targets of the EU’s Growth and Stability Pact, with reference to the Maastricht Treaty levels. Whilst we were in  the EU the limitation of state debt to 60% of GDP and the annual deficit to 3% of GDP applied to us, though we did not face the same enforcement penalties as members of the Eurozone could face. Some people argued the Stability and Growth policy did not apply to us, yet we reported on it annually at the budget, sent in the necessary figures to the EU to monitor our budget and its conformity and had an annual debate about it in Parliament. I did not expect to see the report of these numbers to continue after we had left the EU. Previous Chancellors did guide the economy by seeking to get the deficit down so that state debt fell as a proportion of GDP, as the EU said.

The documents imply that some parts of official thinking believe this is still a good way to guide an economy. There is a concern to see state debt as  a percentage of GDP falling again, which is what we should do to comply with the Pact. I agree there should be some debt control as part of a  sensible strategy but there is no reason to think the 60% percentage of GDP figure for debt and the 3% deficit figure are the best or right ways to steer. There is an argument to say you should treat capital spending differently from day to day spending on public services. If the state is investing in an asset which will generate a positive return  that exceeds the government’s cost of borrowing there is less reason to restrict such spending. I think we need new fiscal rules based around boosting the growth rate and productivity, and distinguishing  between worthwhile investments and other public spending. I will return to this issue soon.

 

151 Comments

  1. Mark B
    March 5, 2021

    Good morning

    The reason I believe the government is still reporting these figures is because we probably agreed to somewhere in the ‘deal’ it accepted from the EU. It also could be as a way of continuity for when Remainers finally get us to rejoin.

    Gordon Brown cheated this restriction by using the PFI’s as some sort of credit card, keeping spending off the books. Something we are paying for now. Let’s not go down that route.

    My belief is that no government should ever spend that which it cannot raise in taxes, and that taxation and money printing should be kept to a minimum. It is no coincidence that those countries which have a low tax regime with good government control are amoungst the wealthiest countries.

    I hope out no hope for this government. Like many it has failed in all its primary duties and is just working for its and its party donors interests. Interests that in no way coincide with the ordinary Conservative voter.

    1. Denis Cooper
      March 5, 2021

      It seems to me that the Tory party is still controlled by eurofederalists, and the question is whether the more patriotic grassroots will ever manage to clear them out of the upper echelons. There was a sad inevitability about Theresa May being automatically reselected for this safe Tory seat when as Prime Minister she had done such appalling damage to our national interest.

      1. NickC
        March 5, 2021

        Not just the Tory party, Denis, the whole government machine is in the hands of the eurofederalists. From the shellfish debacle, to the Northern Ireland Protocol disaster, to the 136 legal cases the EU has instituted against the UK in the ECJ, it is clear we are only semi-detached from the EU. Our civil servants loved trotting off to Brussels and deciding with their fellow civil servants from other EU sub-states just what rules to make. They have tried to foil Brexit at every stage. This is corruption.

      2. ChrisS
        March 5, 2021

        Being a Maidonian, albeit one now living in Chris Chope’s constituency in Dorset, I follow events in Maidenhead with interest. The problem with Teresa May, from our point of view, is that she was always in step with the Remainer majority in the constituency.
        While she was an even worst MP than Gordon Brown, (in itself a bar set so high that I never thought it would be beaten), she has always been a very good constituency MP.
        Luckily, she is so discredited after her period in Downing Street and the fortunate and timely loss of her majority, that she is never likely to be offered a cabinet post again. She can therefore no longer cause any harm, nor could she form a nucleus around which Europhiles could assemble.

        1. Denis Cooper
          March 6, 2021

          So you are an exile! But I am not a native Maidonian, by birth I am a Kentish man.

    2. glen cullen
      March 5, 2021

      While I agree with your points I worry that alignment with EU ‘level playing field’ reporting has take us off on a tangent thats not necessarily to our advantage, or maybe its the influence of the NI protocol ???

      Just when you think you’re out they pull you right back in

      1. Jackson
        March 5, 2021

        The NI protocol problem can very easily be solved- just send produce for NI through Dublin port where it can be checked by EU officials and then trucked up over the border. Problem solved- no need for checks in Belfast or Larne

        1. glen cullen
          March 6, 2021

          So you don’t have a real solution ???

    3. jerry
      March 5, 2021

      @Mark B; “for when Remainers finally get us to rejoin”

      It will not be for Remainers to win any such argument but for Brexiteers to loose it. Whilst the UK doesn’t have the freedom of WTO rules we do have sufficient freedoms now, including an eventual get-out from the Withdrawal Agreement (after 12 months?) should the EU carry on attempting to block our legitimate and internationally agreed options [1] that makes the WA unworkable, between now and Dec. 2024 is time for those who sold us Brexit to make it work for everyone.

      [1] if the EU believes we have broken WTO rules then take us to their disputes arbitration, not ask the European Court to judge

    4. jerry
      March 5, 2021

      Mark, it is also no coincidence that many countries which have low tax regimes, often with strict government controls, are also amongst those countries with the highest social-economic gap between rich and poor, despite their nominal national wealth.

      1. a-tracy
        March 6, 2021

        Jerry, is that the case in Southern Ireland and their low tax regime?

    5. Hope
      March 5, 2021

      Mark,

      Economy was the central plank policy we were told 11 years ago! Low tax Tories we were repeatedly told. Balanced Structural deficit by 2015, 2017,2019 2020 and abandoned by Sunak last year! 80% cuts and 20% tax rises it was claimed by Osborne 11 years ago! Taxation at 70 year high and now about to be getting worse. Sunak has a very poor memory? Even JR years ago admitted the cuts against tax rises did occur. Then we had the deceitful Govt. claim of success as the deficit reduced as a percentage of GDP which is not what was promised.

      All the level playing field rules, state aid, prevent competition etc. Betrayed N.Ireland, betrayed fishing. Let us not forget Johnson signed up the country to the ECHR- foreign court and foreign laws having control over domestic courts in stark contrast to promises made for Brexit and three Fake Tory PMs promising to get rid of ECHR! How many times were we told taking back control of laws, borders and money? Total lies. Laws- N.Ireland shows that is not the case, ECHR applying proves this is not the case, border down Irish Sea and building of custom check posts in our country for foreigners to check goods passing from one part of our country to another! Johnson signed up to multi billion leaving settlement determined by EU and many other initiatives like paying for EU army under Horizon Europe!

      It is a bit like the immigration policy. We read today how thousands of UK citizens refused to be trained as nurses. Therefore to deceitfully help its mass immigration policy it has allowed visa relaxation as a priority for foreign nurses! Presumably so people will not cry out because it relates to NHS using scare of Chines virus. Again, underhand lies. The new I’m iteration policy not worth the paper it is written on, just like a Useles Patel’s complete lack of control of the border in the English Channel! 40% up on last year while Johnson says one of the secure borders in the world! Like his world beating £22 billion test track and test!

      1. glen cullen
        March 5, 2021

        Good words

  2. DOM
    March 5, 2021

    What a tedious, rapacious party you have become. Seeking new rules to justify ever greater levels of debt fuelled State spending simply to bolster your own party’s reputation at the taxpayer’s expense. What type of responsible politician does that? It is abhorrent that you’re not being honest and open with the public about the true size of the National Debt and how State spending is financed using the various methods of debt issuance to conceal the true liability absorbed

    I can now see why so many politicians hated Thatcher. Her honesty about the fundamental nature of State spending and how it is abused to expand State power was a barrier to petty despots who saw an opportunity to build a political power base using our taxes. And now Mr Redwood and his merry crew are doing exactly the same New Labour did when they slimed their way into power on a free lunch ticket

    Your free lunch politics is offensive in its deceit. You can wrap the argument up in fancy language all you like using silly phrases like PSBR, debt maturity dates and the like but at the end of the day using debt to finance political spending is simply deceitful, abusive and exploitative in its desire to conceal from the public the true nature of what your actions

    1. Dave Andrews
      March 5, 2021

      It’s worse than that. It’s not just the present taxpayers who are being touched to pay for all this, it’s the next generation’s as well. The government is borrowing from the children’s future to pay costs this generation won’t tighten its belt to afford.

    2. glen cullen
      March 5, 2021

      I get the gist of what you argue, New Labour in the 90s hoodwinked their own voters to gain power, to a point that their 2020 DNA is completely different – who’d have thought that Labour voters would lend their votes to the Conservatives! The Conservatives are now following the same path 
.hoodwinking, smoke & mirrors and disinformation

      1. Everhopeful
        March 5, 2021

        +1

    3. Hope
      March 5, 2021

      Dom,
      Not “your actions” as it was not JR. He has gone a bit wobbly lately by saying the debt should not be worried about. I think JR would actually be a conservative fiscally prudent low tax conservative chancellor or secretary to Treasury. That is why he will never be chosen by the Blaire tribute act. As an aside Blaire, and now Campbell, claiming it was his vaccine rollout plan.

      Mark and many others on the site for years stated fix the roof while the sun shines ie the deficit and debt had to be addressed. Including utterly wasteful tens of billions in overseas aid. Tories still rebelling this week that overseas aid must be wasted! This is our money from hard working taxpayers, the likes of Mitchell who should have been barred from public office.

      Fake Tories had all the bad publicity for austerity when nothing of substance was happening. Only a fag paper between Darling’s plan and Osborne. Namely the rate of increase in public spending slightly reduced not actual budgets. Quangos were going to be burnt. Osborne was going to start to pay down the debt by 2015. Nevertheless debt doubled under Tories balanced structural deficit never occurred. More wasteful spending and more taxation. This budget in the same socialist vein.

      1. Caterpillar
        March 6, 2021

        Hope,

        I am sorry to say that I believe Dom is correct in his term “your actions”. MPs voted to give Johnson et al dictatorial powers, and whilst the country was destroyed by propaganda and terror promoted policies, Tory MPs left Johnson in control. It is not a virus that has put the country in the situation it is in, it is the fundamental human rights abusing policies of the Govt. Tory MPs are the ones who could have stopped this by removing Johnson, they did not, they are complicit, they are not innocent. There is not one jot of remorse for the vileness they have permitted, they do not push for action to hold Johnson to political and legal account. The Conservatives are now supported through propaganda, fear, created dependence and misguided loyalty. Conservative MPs don’t even call this out.

        Of course, Sir John writes interesting and well argued political, economic and social analyses, but these are worthless distraction whilst Tory MPs have created and allowed a dictatorship to destroy fundamental liberty, and even now Tory MPs keep the dictatorship in place. Of course they don’t worry, but their positions are indefensible, any humanity they might claim illegitimate.

  3. jerry
    March 5, 2021

    Do we need formally laid out fiscal rules? Surely its a matter of common sense, unless of course the country can not trust govt, the civil service and backbench MPs to deploy the correct polices for the problems faced. To model anything on EU’s Eurozone rules, never mind tie our coat-tails to them, is crazy and nothing but virtue signalling – after all how many times has the EU broken their own rules when it suited their needs for the UK to carry on following the rules religiously!

    1. jerry
      March 5, 2021

      The EU has, in the last 24 hours, further rubbished its own reputation due to their ‘Do as we say, not as we do’ attitude, whilst demanding that the UK stick to their international contracts (or treaties) but then casing aside it’s own legally binding contact with Australia!

      1. James
        March 5, 2021

        We should be careful about throwing out international treaties or articles we don’t like- we still hold a lot of territories overseas held by international treaties and if others pick up on this fashion of disregarding the parts we don’t like then who knows where it might all go? we are not the world power we once were and treaties have to matter much more to us now than before.

        1. Leslie Singleton
          March 5, 2021

          Dear James–It is only treaties with the EU that we are cherry picking against, minimally as required. To me at least, that makes a difference. It is the EU’s attitude that is all wrong and I much doubt anywhere in the world is going to think the less of us for doing what we have to do to protect Northern Island. Apart from all else, the stuff about a “hard border”, whatever that means today, is well OTT.

          1. glen cullen
            March 5, 2021

            I still can’t get my head around the fact that this Tory government has separated NI from UK
..did that really happen

        2. a-tracy
          March 5, 2021

          James, I thought the treaty wasn’t signed by the EU yet and was still in a state of limbo until the end of April now. I also thought the original withdrawal agreement expired on Dec 31st 2020.

          How can the EU apply anything in the new agreement if they haven’t ratified and signed it off?

          I hope Boris and team have made a provision for us to leave at the end of April on just WTO now because the intention so far isn’t friendly and we have been warned. Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom.

      2. Grey Friar
        March 5, 2021

        The contract is between a drugs company and Australia. Italy has intervened. It is literally nothing to do with the EU. But thank you for this insight into the Brexiter mindset – you don’t care about facts, you just want to shout abuse at the EU, a body whose workings are a complete closed book to you

        Reply They sought and received EU agreement as the vaccine programme is an EU led matter.

        1. Fred.H
          March 5, 2021

          But Third country orders ahead of EU population based shipments should take priority – am I missing something? Oh. Of course EU frantically setting new law to retrospectively deal with an almighty cock-up they made.

        2. jerry
          March 5, 2021

          @Grey Friar; “thank you for this insight into the Brexiter mindset – you don’t care about facts”

          Talk about the pot trying to call the kettle black, best YOU check the facts!

        3. NickC
          March 5, 2021

          Grey, Draghi is an EU plant. Do keep up.

          1. MiC
            March 5, 2021

            He enjoys the support of Salvini’s party whatever you claim.

        4. a-tracy
          March 5, 2021

          Grey “UPDATED: Thursday, March 4 at 4:03 p.m. ET – A shipment of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines bound for Australia has been blocked by Italy and the European Union because of the company’s failure to meet contractual commitments with Europe. With AZ requesting to export 250,000 doses of the vaccine from a Catalent plant in Anagni, Italy refused and the EU backed the decision.” fiercepharma.com

          I actually do feel for Italy they have had a bad covid experience as has the UK and Australia has been lauded for having none of the lockdown restrictions we have had recently, they’re open for business have been able to trade, party and carry on.
          Europe has been much harder hit economically, so a priority to the EU seems to be getting their own people vaccinated.

          1. Fred.H
            March 5, 2021

            Italy should have appealed to Australia on the grounds of morality and future relationship to delay their consignment. Italy with severe Covid stats, and the 250k due to be shipped around EU, not all consumed by Italy. Italy could then have looked properly humanitarian instead of like a state Cosa Nostra.

  4. agricola
    March 5, 2021

    New rules to better reflect the state of the economy, by all means if deemed necessary. However to change the rules in the middle of a covid created financial crisis does not best serve comparison of before and after. Unless of course the original rules distort reality. A change from imperial to metric mid project can cause problems.

    It appears to me that government do not operate by normal commercial rules. They only justify capital spending with political reasoning. I have yet to see the justification for HS2 with any figures for return on capital outlay. It is not as if the justification is that it is a great technological advance, a la Concord, because there are many around the world, some even more advanced. The Channel tunnel is currently asking for operating subsidy from government, confirming it was a poor capital investment to have considered in the first place. The Boris Burrow to NI indicates just how far politicians will go to find something to plant a flag on.

    The normal commercial rules of profit and loss only get nuanced when government changes tax rules or auditors find themselves in a conflict of interest situation. For the majority of businesses the rules are relatively stable. Perhaps government should learn to live by established commercial rules so that the electors who pay the bill get value for money.

  5. Sea_Warrior
    March 5, 2021

    I would like to see the government concentrate more on two measures: (1) GDP/capita; and (2) the balance of trade.

    1. Narrow Shoulders
      March 5, 2021

      Yes – good shout

    2. outsider
      March 5, 2021

      Totally agree

  6. Lifelogic
    March 5, 2021

    Indeed.

    You say:- There is an argument to say you should treat capital spending differently from day to day spending on public services. If the state is investing in an asset which will generate a positive return that exceeds the government’s cost of borrowing there is less reason to restrict such spending.

    Well perhaps but governments (especially recent ones) are so appalling at choosing ‘investments’ and so inefficient at executing them that most ‘investments’ are essentially just pissing money down the drain. HS2, all the subsidies for renewables. Bureaucrats are good at claiming all sorts of lunacies are investments. They would not recognise a good investment if it punched them in the face. Not their money nor they who get the value so they simply do not give a damn in general. Just as happy blocking roads like Kahn or building new one so long as they get a good salary and gold plated pension.

    1. Nig l
      March 5, 2021

      Indeed. They rely on a gullible public misunderstanding the meaning if investment. And in other news the government accepts no responsibility for a Mandarin leaving because of the actions of a Minister of State yet settles an eye watering amount. Nothing to do with not wanting the truth to come out at a tribunal then?

      1. Lifelogic
        March 5, 2021

        I do not know the details of this care but I do think that special arrangement need to apply for people working in such sensitive posts. This as they can often extract very large sums of taxpayers money just to save any political embarrassment. If these well paid and pensioned senior people have problems working for ministers they should resign with a standard pay off or be moved to another position with no rights to litigate.

        I would have easy hire and fire everywhere. The system mainly benefits the poorer workers on the make and lawyers in my experience. Not good workers whose wages get depressed as a result. The NHS should have standard compensations too when things go wrong if people want more go privately or tax insurance. Cut out the lawyers. This, combined with an open error reporting system, would be a vast improvement for all but the lawyers.

        1. Lifelogic
          March 5, 2021

          This case! not care.

    2. Hope
      March 5, 2021

      LL, there are no fiscal rules, the green whacko lunacy made that clear on Wednesday! Mass immigration to continue to create growth as Sunak said he and Patel would make visas easier! They are already denying UK citizens nursing job training to get them from abroad by the tens of thousand! Thinking we would not notice or they could rely on the sham immigration policy which is nothing like Australia’s. same old same old garbage from Fake Tories, as you say spend, tax and piss it down the drain.

  7. Lifelogic
    March 5, 2021

    At last someone sensible (Prof. David Spiegelhalter) has also pointed out that JCVI should certainly have adjust for gender risk.

    1. IanT
      March 5, 2021

      But he also said that there were good practical reasons not to do so….

      1. MWB
        March 5, 2021

        I think that the good practical reasons would not have applied, if women were more at risk.

      2. Lifelogic
        March 5, 2021

        Not so. He said that in relation to more complex things like jobs and other more complex to analyse risk factors. Nothing complicated about “we will vaccinate men over 65 and women over 70” – then over 60 and 65 etc. Also it would have enabled lifting the lockdown 2 to 3 weeks earlier saving ÂŁbillions (as well as saving many hundred of lives).

    2. Lifelogic
      March 5, 2021

      Hopefully other countries at least will adopt this and the single dose first policy – as these two measure together will surely save hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide. But then again these countries are run by politicians too, many of who are daft as we see with Macron. Many have not even adopted the single dose each first policy which saves even more lives.

    3. Hope
      March 6, 2021

      LL,

      The NHS give you four choices of gender! When I stated there are only two a man and woman he replied we got to ask which one of the four! So NHS determined to ask unscientific question, not follow science mantra, so where do the other two fare? Seriously are vaccines in trans people effected differently because of hormone treatments etc? How many transgender people were in the trials? What happens if they trans back to original gender during the next two years before medium and long term side effects are known?

      I did not think about this until NHS raised the mandatory question which one of the four genders I identified with. If there are no differences why are they asking? Why are they even asking when they know your name and dob before asking? Very weird. I think Simon Stevens needs to be sacked for gross incompetence on failing the nation and a total failure of health preparedness etc, but this adds another reason.

  8. Fred.H
    March 5, 2021

    Dozens of Covid contracts had not been published when Boris Johnson told MPs they were “on the record for everyone to see”, campaigners say. The Good Law Project said the PM’s assurance last month was “not true” because government lawyers had said 100 contracts were yet to be revealed.
    The group successfully sued the government over its failure to reveal details about Covid deals last month. The government said remaining contracts would be published as soon as possible.
    The Department for Health and Social Care struck deals worth hundreds of millions of pounds during the coronavirus pandemic.
    The government is required by law to publish a “contract award notice” within 30 days of the awarding any contracts for public goods or services worth more than ÂŁ120,000.
    So why the reluctance to publish?

    1. glen cullen
      March 5, 2021

      You should stick with staying indoors and saving the NHS, let the elites and politicians run the country as they see fit
.its for your own good – never question government – to question the state is treason 
do you understand comrade

  9. Lifelogic
    March 5, 2021

    Paul Mason yesterday on Politics Live: – “We have to leave behind the dinosaur economics of the IEA, Milton Friedman and Thatcherism”.

    We never really even really tried this mate (not in your lifetime nor mine). We still even have dire virtual state monopolies in healthcare and education (with fairly appalling outcomes). Where we did try it, only very slightly, it worked exceptionally well. Thatcher after all won three elections in a row (four really with Major as her chosen man until voters sussed him). All the other Tory leaders in my lifetime have been essentially pro EU/socialists light. Still your wish has now been granted. Sensible economics has certainly been buried by Boris & Sunak’s appalling, growth restricting, investment deterring, red tape spewing, ever bigger state budget. Carrie’s & Boris’s climate alarmist lunacy to add even further damage to the mix.

    I suppose the government would even describe the £trillions to be wasted on the bonkers war against CO2 plant food an “investment” for people yet to be born in 100 years time?

  10. MiC
    March 5, 2021

    When national debt under Labour was nothing like what it is now – and interest rates were not much different either – you were one of the most vocal in saying that this was absolutely insupportable and unsustainable.

    What has changed, John?

    Reply Interest rates are much lower and debt service charges have fallen as a proportion of revenue. This is a one off caused by widespread closure of parts of the economy for health reasons. All very different.

    1. Nig l
      March 5, 2021

      And what happens when QE runs out of puff and all the money washing around translates into inflation?

    2. Narrow Shoulders
      March 5, 2021

      Reply to reply
      Sir John you were advocating much increased spending during the last election campaign and its immediate aftermath pre Covid. That was not a one-off but you were keen to spend wildly.

      Reply Not wildly. I also proposed a number of reductions to PE

      1. Hope
        March 5, 2021

        JR, but the spending was against repeated party promises to get elected was it not? Econ9my being the “Central plank”? Osborne was going to be paying back the debt after 2015 when he achieved a balanced structural deficit. How did that go?

        Reply My recommendations were somewhat different.

    3. Everhopeful
      March 5, 2021

      From HoC Library
      “The magnitude of the recession caused by the pandemic is unprecedented in modern times. GDP declined by 9.9% in 2020, the steepest drop since consistent records began in 1948”.

      It may be caused by the govt’s response to a pandemic but did the response need to be so extreme?
      Maybe if a virus was about to hit us ( and no one can say they hadn’t “modelled” the scenario to extinction) we SHOULD HAVE HAD A PANDEMIC-READY HEALTH SERVICE??

      1. Pauline Baxter
        March 5, 2021

        Everhopeful. The recession wasn’t even caused by the so called pandemic. It was caused by the Tory Government’s response to the pandemic! As I think you have noticed.
        I dare say we will survive the economic problems – provided we get sensible about producing electricity from reliable sources in time to avoid power cuts.
        But will we EVER get back our fundamental liberties?
        The present DICTATORSHIP is intent on continuing.

        1. Everhopeful
          March 5, 2021

          +1

      2. Hope
        March 5, 2021

        E,
        The Govt failed to act on its own pandemic plan and that of the WHO. Instead it followed authoritarian communist China!

        Conversely it could have adopted The Great Barrington Declaration endorsed by thousands of doctors and scientists by protecting the elderly and vulnerable. A bit like the vaccine rollout! Govt graphs showing how well vaccinating/protecting the elderly reduces hospital demand and deaths in elderly. Let us consider all those of working age, without underlying health issues, could have carried on working! Children going to school. Goodness who would have thought?

        1. Everhopeful
          March 5, 2021

          +1

    4. MiC
      March 5, 2021

      Thank you John, but I’m sorry.

      You are now dealing in relatives but were absolute back then.

      Interest rates are now lower relative to what they were then, but they were already very low, as were the charges.

      It’s a bit different now, but not “very” different.

      Your critics here have a point, I think.

      1. NickC
        March 5, 2021

        Martin, It is very different now. The economy has been decimated. Possibly about half the loss was due to the government’s ridiculous policy of untargeted national lockdowns. But that still means the other half (c5%) was due to the covid19 pandemic itself. So an economic stimulus would always have been needed. Anyway, Martin, you can congratulate yourself that your frenzy for lockdowns will cost the young unnecessary ÂŁbillions.

        1. MiC
          March 5, 2021

          I congratulate myself constantly on being nothing like you.

  11. oldtimer
    March 5, 2021

    The idea that the political class will abide by any fiscal rules is laughable. The rules are there to be manipulated, broken or ignored. There is no evidence that any effort is intended to reduce the collosal debt burden incurred over the past year. Unspoken is the assumption that inflation will take care of it as taxes of the inflated prices of goods and as taxes on the frozen allowances before you pay tax on income, capital gains or inheritance all go up. For Sunak it is a heads I win, tails you lose bet on a game in which he sets the rules.

    PS I read that the Daily Mail says that the cost of No 10’s flat refurbishment could be as high as ÂŁ200k. Government spending clearly is totally out of control.

    1. Nig l
      March 5, 2021

      Yes. The governor of the B.O.E had to write every year why targets were missed, nothing if course happened. A complete waste of time. Government targets are political BS.

    2. Lifelogic
      March 5, 2021

      You can build a couple of new, small two or three bed houses for around £200k. Could they not get some cheap wallpaper offcuts from Osborne’s family? Doubtless this will be called an “investment” but where is the investment return? A happier Carrie perhaps? Then again it might distract her from her vastly expensive ‘net zero’ lunacy which would be a fabulous return on capital of £200k !

      It is of course very wasteful of energy and other resources to spend such a large sum on interior design but then the climate alarmists are nearly always full of hypocrisy in the Prince Charles, Emma Thompson mode.

    3. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      And I thought I saw Carrie in B & Q going through the bargain bin of wallpapers.
      Must of been mistaken?

      1. NickC
        March 5, 2021

        Yup, yer gotta larf – Meg’an’Arry and Boris’n’Carrie and EU petulance! What have we done to deserve them?

        1. Lifelogic
          March 5, 2021

          +1

    4. Everhopeful
      March 5, 2021

      PS But you see…he could only claim ÂŁ30,000 for the refurb so ( it is claimed) he thought he’d ask for some donations. A bit like a crowd fund or charity.
      “No fool like an old fool” as my grandma used to say.

      I’m off out the front with my placard…we could do with a new sofa!

    5. a-tracy
      March 5, 2021

      The average household redecorates every five years. A quality kitchen should last 20 years and bathrooms 10 years. Obviously low use small families without pets can get away with longer. So if Downing Street is within those parameters I don’t see a problem. Especially if they are using British paints and wallpapers, decorators, produce and Instagram it and perhaps the paint companies and wallpaper companies would donate the product for promotional purposes. Downing Street is a working environment with lots of visitors it should be a place to represent the United Kingdom and the best of our design.

      1. Alan Jutson
        March 5, 2021

        Blimey I am way off course then, last kitchen lasted 30 years, last bathroom 35, before being replaced again with excellent quality units and fittings, surely its all about the cleverness of the design, practicality of use and the excellence of the product and fitting, rather than vanity and fashion.
        Same policy with cars, both of our cars combined have a total of 34 years ownership.

        ÂŁ200,000 for a redecoration of a flat even in London is crazy money, I would expect a complete and utter total refurbishment for that to include all new electrics, heating etc etc.

        1. glen cullen
          March 5, 2021

          ÂŁ200,000 is only crazy money if its yours – if its someone elses….. well thats another story

        2. a-tracy
          March 6, 2021

          Alan, I’m not a spendthrift, our combined cars are over 30 years old and combined have over 280,000 miles on the clocks. My kitchen is 15 years old and was a good quality one that will be able to be refreshed not like the cheap one the builders put in that fell to bits with three children in the house. BUT I like my house to modern, clean and fresh with a new lick of paint. £200,000 is too much I agree and if they were smart they’d act as influencers and get their work done free. What a brilliant advertisement for British designers to showcase their best work in a place that gets shown in all the best magazines, tv shows, etc. It is not a ‘private’ home and they could be out of it in three/four years time or sooner.

      2. Lifelogic
        March 5, 2021

        I usually only decorate just before I sell up! Once every 20 years is more than enough. Just look after the roof and gutters.

        1. a-tracy
          March 6, 2021

          I find that quite sad Lifelogic, what’s the point of making all this money you make if you and your family don’t enjoy the benefits of it in your daily space there are no pockets in shrouds. My husband likes to decorate for our enjoyment of our space not just to make money out of on sale we tend to redecorate about every six years some lower used spaces longer gaps. But I like all the walls to be clean and updated/modern in the space I live in.

      3. oldtimer
        March 5, 2021

        The refurbishments are of the private quarters not the public spaces.

        1. a-tracy
          March 6, 2021

          They receive visitors, foreign dignitaries in those ‘private quarters’ too oldtimer. I truly believe they should use it as a promotion opportunity for British companies to showcase their products and get it all done free.

    6. IanT
      March 5, 2021

      It’s not Government spending – although it seems Boris may have a domestic spending problem.

    7. Lifelogic
      March 5, 2021

      Boris this looks even worse politically than Labour Deputy Leader one Angela Rayner charging the taxpayer ÂŁ249 for a pair of PERSONALISED Apple headphone and the various other stuff.

      No a good look mate. But if Carrie lets you drop all the insane ÂŁbillion spend on the idiotic war on CO2 let her have it. Then it would be the bargain of a lifetime.

      1. glen cullen
        March 5, 2021

        Whats the point of checks & balance if everyone is corrupt

  12. Ian Kaye
    March 5, 2021

    These figures are entirely spurious. When the Euro came into being only Ireland and Luxembourg met these two requirements.

  13. Denis Cooper
    March 5, 2021

    Off-topic, there is a letter from the British Ambassador in the Irish Times:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/british-ambassador-on-the-ni-protocol-1.4501531

    “Sir, – I write to set out the background to, and rationale for, the UK’s decision on March 3rd in relation to the Northern Ireland protocol …”

    It is unusual for the UK government to publicly defend itself in the Irish media in this way, and the problem in this case is that the defence of its present actions is weak and its promises for the future are unacceptable to us even if the Irish government might welcome them, without trusting them.

    1. Nig l
      March 5, 2021

      Yes and unfortunately as time goes on we see more and more the weaknesses of our negotiation across many areas and a rabbit in the headlights approach by Ministers who have departments affected.

  14. Sir Joe Soap
    March 5, 2021

    I care neither about the EU nor about Meghan Markles.
    I do however care about Australia, and that we should be sharing our vaccines with them to make up their shortfall. Same with Ireland and any other friends which are failed by the undemocratic EU.

    1. No Longer Anonymous
      March 5, 2021

      A good use of soft power.

    2. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      I don’t think shipping 250k of vaccines will hurt our rollout much -but shows the world we care for friends and want to work around the childish spite. Friends Lives Matter.

    3. IanT
      March 5, 2021

      Are the Irish our friends? Not sure the former Taoiseach was that friendly towards us.

    4. ChrisS
      March 5, 2021

      I would have been straight on the phone to Scott Morrison to see how Australia was affected by this appalling decision by the EU. Had they needed the 250,000 doses urgently, I would have sent them the very next day, as a gift from the UK.

      Fortunately, it appears that the decision to ban the export from Italy will not unduly harm our friends and partner in the Five Eyes network so it was not necessary. The move will, however, be deeply harmful to the EU which seems completely oblivious to the PR consequences of its recent behaviour.

    5. Christine
      March 5, 2021

      The EU is now gloating that they have also stopped the AstraZeneca vaccine exports to the UK from the Netherlands plant. We provided British trained workers to help out with the vaccine production. It’s time to withdraw our goodwill and bring them all home.

  15. Ian Kaye
    March 5, 2021

    These figures are entirely spurious. When the Euro came into existence only Luxembourg and Ireland met these two requirements.

    1. Lifelogic
      March 5, 2021

      Did not help Ireland much after joining. Have they repaid their bail out loan from the UK yet?

      1. Dennis
        March 5, 2021

        ‘Have they repaid their bail out loan from the UK yet?’ Even this simple question requiring a simple answer is beyond JR’s knowledge.

        Reply No it is not but the info you need is easily available. Ireland has been repaying on schedule and the last payment is due this month.

      2. hefner
        March 5, 2021

        The loan by the UK was for ÂŁ3.25bn. The RoI did offer to repay it in 2018 but the UK refused an earlier repayment preferring to pocket ÂŁ358m of interest. It now appears the loan should be repaid by the end of March 2021.
        https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/41/enacted. ‘Loans to Ireland Act 2010’

    2. a-tracy
      March 5, 2021

      And what do those two countries have in common Ian – Military spending – “Security in our daily lives is key to our well-being. NATO’s purpose is to guarantee the freedom and security of its members through political and military means”. The burden should be shared out evenly.

      Luxembourg is the tightest Nato ally, according to 2017 figures, spending less than 0.5 per cent of its GDP.
      In Irelands case in 2017 – The 2 per cent of their GDP on armed forces spending would amount to around €4.3 billion annually they contribute 0.3%.

  16. Narrow Shoulders
    March 5, 2021

    I fail to see the inflationary difference between government creating money and not paying interest on it and banks creating money to loan to government which pays interest on it.

    The usury element of this transaction seems wrong.

  17. Fenny Compton
    March 5, 2021

    Amazingly the Chancellor thinks it useful to compare our policies with 27 neighbouring countries with which we do a lot of trade. But for you that is a betrayal. You will never be satisfied until the UK government refuses to admit the EU even exists. And probably not even then

    1. Nig l
      March 5, 2021

      And why shouldn’t JR be suspicious when the Treasury especially has shown such a craven attitude to the EU over many years, indeed the architects of project fear.

    2. Andy
      March 5, 2021

      I suspect it’s jealousy. The EU can still sell fish and, because of Brexit, we can’t.

      1. a-tracy
        March 5, 2021

        “London has been names top city in the World to invest in.” Schroders’ Global Cities Index. This is money. Up from second place last year thanks to scoring highly on environmental and social factors.

    3. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      The EU is a nagging splinter you just cannot remove, you can see it, feel it, dig around it, but just cannot ignore the regular sharp pain.

    4. NickC
      March 5, 2021

      Fenny, Neighbours? Norway is a lot closer than Greece. Even Morocco is as near! Does Poland compare its economy with Ukraine’s? Or are you being precious about your EU empire?

  18. Alan Jutson
    March 5, 2021

    I have no idea as to what rate of debt the Country can afford, as the rules, income, and interest is a moving target, as indeed are the number of people in the Country, and likewise their health and employment status, add into the mix vanity projects, and party political dogma, it would be a wonder if anyone knew.

    Enough to say that debt should be as low as is practical, whatever that means, certainly from a personal point of view the only debt we ever carried as a family was a mortgage, everything else was purchased out of savings.
    If you cannot afford it do not spend it was the simple criteria used.
    That and the logic to work longer, harder, and smarter if you needed to improve your income.

  19. DOM
    March 5, 2021

    It’s so desperately sad and disheartening to see the hopeless, hapless Tories aping Socialist Labour with their ‘more State spending is a good’ mantra when we all know that more State spending equals more creation of waste and an expansion of State power over all things. And this nonsense about changing the fiscal rules is pure bollox. In other words they need to find a justification to increase State spending again. Just admit that this is the case rather than acting deceitfully. It’s embarrassing having to listen to these wretches who propagate such con-tricks

    More State spending is a thinly concealed power grab by the State vested interest and it seems John’s become a pure bred Keynesian quite simply because it’s politically convenient to be so. That’s simply wrong on every level.

    Sunak, the once pure bred Thatcherite is now a Keynesian bullshitter par excellence. You couldn’t invent it

  20. Roy Grainger
    March 5, 2021

    On a somewhat related topic I see the target for the BoE is now not just 2% inflation but also “net zero”. This is a curious target in many ways. How can the BoE actually achieve it ? What influence do they have over it ? I suppose they could squeeze the economy so tightly that major energy using industries went bankrupt, that would help reach the target.

    If they’re going to operate according to vague political aspirations as “targets” why not “Full employment” or “A strong pound” or “Affordable housing”, in fact why not make the bank’s “target” everything that was in the Government’s manifesto ?

    1. Denis Cooper
      March 5, 2021

      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/monetary-policy-remit-budget-2021/monetary-policy-remit-budget-2021

      “The Bank of England Act 1998 (the Act) requires that I specify the definition of price stability and the government’s economic policy objectives at least once in every period of 12 months beginning on the anniversary of the day the Act came into force.”

      They are two separate things that the Chancellor must specify.

      For the first:

      “I hereby re-confirm the inflation target as 2 per cent as measured by the 12-month increase in the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) … ”

      For the second:

      “In accordance with the Act, I also confirm that the government’s economic policy objective is to achieve strong, sustainable and balanced growth … I am today updating the MPC’s remit to reflect the government’s economic strategy for achieving strong, sustainable and balanced growth that is also environmentally sustainable and consistent with the transition to a net zero economy.”

      Plus, quietly, he confirms that the Bank of England will continue to create new money so it can buy up gilts issued by the Treasury to borrow the money needed to cover the government’s budget deficit:

      “I confirm that the Asset Purchase Facility will remain in place for the financial year 2021-22.”

  21. Andy
    March 5, 2021

    A close friend of mine is a doctor. I know a couple of nurses quite well too. I see from their Facebook pages this morning that they are their colleagues are apoplectic with the derisory 1% Tory pay rise NHS staff have been offered.

    We get that the Tory economy is dire but these people have literally risked their lives for a year. Billions of pounds have been awarded in contracts to unqualified Tory friends and a nurse gets a slap in the face. Awful.

    Reply The Pay Body will recommend the rate

    1. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      But don’t forget tens of thousands (a hundred thousand?) of NHS workers have been at home on full pay for a year, quoting family risk etc. I know examples. Of course 1% is tiny – but they all have a secure job. Several million don’t – review pay increase in a year or two.

      1. glen cullen
        March 5, 2021

        Agree

      2. Fedupsoutherner
        March 5, 2021

        Agree Fred. A friend of mine works in a bank and contracted Covid. She became very ill but has recovered, however, her husband is in ICU abd not expected to pull through. Yes, we know nurses have worked hard under arduous conditions but it is what you sign up for when we opt to take a job in nursing. Our armed forces know they may be called upon to go to war but we don’t hear them going on about money and they don’t have unions threatening strike action. There are many who have died working in the private sector keeping the country going and there is only so much money to go around so what gets left out when the money isn’t there? I get a bit fed up with public sector workers with big powerful unions moaning all the time when they have had job security all this time. Count your blessings. It’s not just the public sector that have lost lives.

        1. turboterrier
          March 5, 2021

          F U S
          Well said

    2. Long
      March 5, 2021

      What was this year’s pay increase for MPs? ÂŁ3360 on basic plus ÂŁ10k to set up working from home. Please introduce performance-related pay.

    3. Dave Andrews
      March 5, 2021

      The nurses that don’t live in their own bubble will have friends who have suffered financially and even lost their income entirely during the Covid pandemic. Those nurses appreciate their income has been unaffected and their public sector pension remains secure. Furthermore, if they have had to go off long-term sick, they will have six months full pay followed by six months at half pay, as opposed to their private sector friends who get nothing when their business fails.
      Let’s show our appreciation of the NHS staff by relieving them of the responsibility of treating self-inflicted lifestyle diseases, and leave that to the private sector (paid for by the patient or his insurance company) so they can devote their attention to the genuinely sick.

    4. Everhopeful
      March 5, 2021

      I thought they got 2.8% last year?

    5. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      Andy has your friend the doctor actually worked in surgery premises, meeting patients, visiting care homes, making referrals? In which case that is unusual certainly in Wokingham area, and others I hear about. Typical full hours salary about ÂŁ100k – he/she would really need above 1% pay rise. In any case Doctor contracts are quite separate to the downtrodden nurses who soldiered on without their presence.

      1. Fedupsoutherner
        March 5, 2021

        To see a GP in our practise now and all through the pandrmic you have to be virtually dying.

    6. NickC
      March 5, 2021

      Andy, Researchers from Stanford University said that UK deaths from covid19 in non-vulnerable groups (healthy under 60s) are “remarkably uncommon”. Literally. The risk is similar to the risk of living normally.

  22. Andy
    March 5, 2021

    I see Cyprus is saying that vaccinated Britons can visit from May. The UK government must refuse.

    Some older people may have had both of their jabs by May, but millions of younger people will not have even been offered their first one.

    It is unfair that older people should be allowed to return to normal life before everyone else. The borders should be opened for everybody at the same time – when we have all had our vaccines.

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      March 5, 2021

      But think of the bonus. Not having to see young British throwing up in the streets after getting too drunk on their 18-30 holidays. What a reprieve.

    2. beresford
      March 5, 2021

      Our borders will be open to ‘everybody at the same time’, on March 17th. It is the Cypriot borders that are in question, and they are entitled to apply whatever rules they like. Apparently non-inoculated folk (only) will be required to take a covid test before entry, which is illogical because inoculation doesn’t prevent you from carrying or transmitting covid19.

      1. beresford
        March 5, 2021

        Apologies, MAY 17th.

    3. Sea_Warrior
      March 5, 2021

      A silly position. In case you haven’t noticed, the oldies have been dropping dead in their tens of thousands, from COVID, in the past year. The sooner we can get air-travel going again, the sooner we can get tens of thousands of people, mainly youngish, back to work in the jobs they love. In the meantime, content yoursef with some bucket & spade time in a UK resort. I’m off to Paphos!

      1. Fred.H
        March 6, 2021

        shame on you.

    4. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      I agree – I’d vote for nobody leaves our soil for at least another year, and only when they agree to 14 day quarantine in Army barracks on return at their cost.

    5. NickC
      March 5, 2021

      Andy, But it’s wholly unfair that young people get subsidised for 18 years where older, wiser, and more deserving retired people are only subsidized for 15 years (66 to 81). The least that young people can do is forego their foreign holiday in a show of solidarity with their elders. That would be fairer, wouldn’t it?

    6. jon livesey
      March 6, 2021

      “I see Cyprus is saying that vaccinated Britons can visit from May. The UK government must refuse.”

      Eh? Refuse what? Are you seriously suggesting that a UK Government would prevent its citizens from visiting Cyprus? On what pretext? Your posts sound more and more authoritarian, like something out of East Germany.

  23. Everhopeful
    March 5, 2021

    Maybe, unbeknown to MPs ( who seem to have a surprising lack of insider knowledge or influence. ) we never really left?
    I keep seeing reports of EU outrage because the UK is allegedly not “following the rules”. What rules?
    But we certainly appear to comply with some EU diktats like, I believe, GDPR, which has stopped me buying US goods.
    Or was the EU a handy foil to conceal our global commitments?

    Never mind Boris is well ahead in the polls so we are safe from a socialist takeover….oh wait……

    1. MiC
      March 5, 2021

      The rules that both parties agreed would govern matters in a solemn international treaty, that’s what rules.

      You can pretend to have a memory like a gnat if you like, but those actually engaged in international relations do not.

      1. Fred.H
        March 5, 2021

        oh dear has Everh touched a nerve?

      2. Everhopeful
        March 5, 2021

        You mean Boris keeps reneging?
        I thought it was goldfish re memory!

        1. Fred.H
          March 5, 2021

          wrong about goldfish – every time a heron lands at my pond, I startle it after it probably had a meal – the goldfish (etc) stay at the bottom and don’t reappear for days.

      3. Peter2
        March 5, 2021

        It is an agreement that either party can withdraw from.
        Just like domestic laws which can be revised or deleted by new elected governments.

  24. beresford
    March 5, 2021

    The United States have removed the punitive tariffs on a number of British products, including Scotch, which were imposed as a consequence of EU membership. The Brexit dividend keeps on giving!

    1. Sea_Warrior
      March 5, 2021

      I’ll look out for Blackford’s giving a public thank you to Liz Truss next week in the Commons.

    2. hefner
      March 5, 2021

      Well, President Trump imposed these tariffs on Scotch whisky in October 2019 because of the dispute between Airbus and Boeing regarding subsidies.
      Eighteen months ago, I had slipped in my garden and twisted my ankle, I guess it was because of our EU membership.
      It is fortunately much better now and am sure it is a Brexit dividend.

  25. Peter
    March 5, 2021

    Off topic for today, but from the budget – can anyone enlighten me why The Government is setting the contactless limit on cards and what it has to do with them??

    1. Fred.H
      March 5, 2021

      Correct – shouldn’t it be each Bank prepared to take on board ease of customer access and associated risk?

    2. Everhopeful
      March 5, 2021

      I have read that it is a pandemic response.
      Nudging us nearer to a “cashless economy”.
      The Nudge Unit!
      ( I really do think that the Chancellor or JR would have been better people to nudge us into losing weight than “full of beans” Boris).

    3. ChrisS
      March 5, 2021

      This is clearly intended to finish off the use of cash for almost any transaction.

  26. William Long
    March 5, 2021

    I am afraid that all this does is demonstrate the extent to which the Treasury is tied into its old ways of EU subservience and has become quite incapable of original thought. Sadly, from the recent Budget, it does not look as if the Chancellor Sunak, is doing anything to change this.

  27. Pauline Baxter
    March 5, 2021

    Dear Sir John,
    I agree with you. It is ridiculous, now we are out of the EU, to be comparing our fiscal measures to their fiscal rules.
    On the whole I think the Chancellor’s budget was as good as could be done in the circumstances. In particular, the attempt to encourage genuine investment in England’s productive industries while discouraging ‘pseudo investment’, (in bureaucratic empire building), is the right direction.
    However, I will fight your Party and your Government tooth and nail, over the Dictatorship it has imposed and continues to expand, over the Covid19, so called pandemic.
    We are now THREATENED with Vaccination Passports. This is mandatory, untested, medical intervention, OR WE LOSE THE LAST CHANCE OF FREEDOM.
    Please do all you can to make sure this is stopped. There is a Petition to be discussed this month. Your Party really should back down on the threatened measure.

  28. BJC
    March 5, 2021

    I thought Sir William Cash’s general opinion on the Association Agreement identified that we would remain aligned to the EU UNLESS Parliament decided otherwise? It was always a worry that our pro-EU Parliament would have the will to adapt to life outside of the EU, but is this not the answer?

  29. acorn
    March 5, 2021

    The Maastricht Treaty was definitely a treaty too far. The creation of the euro as the common currency of the EU and then crippling it by setting limits for members deficits to 3 % of GDP and debt levels to 60 % of GDP; was a huge mistake. The limits didn’t and still haven’t any macroeconomic foundation whatsoever.

    The Stability and Growth Pact; The Six Pack; The Fiscal Compact; The Excessive Deficit Procedure and there multiple variations, have severely handicapped, for no good reason, all member states except Germany and the Netherlands.

    There are multiple metrics for debt and deficits. For instance US “total” debt and deficit at the end of 2020 was 130% and 15% of GDP. The same metric for the UK was 140% and 10%. They are both measures of private sector savings of the government’s money.

    Excellent segment on the Today program from Prof David Edgerton when UK post war debt was circa 250% of GDP. Politicians actually knew how a fiat currency could be worked to finance a massive dislocation of the economy. Sadly, they don’t make politicians like that anymore.

  30. Ex-Tory
    March 5, 2021

    Care would need to be taken that moving the goalposts in this way didn’t scare the capital markets.

    And allowance needs to be made for the fact that capital items depreciate.

    Above all, if not very careful your suggestion would lead to an ever expanding state sector crowding out the private.

  31. turboterrier
    March 5, 2021

    distinguishing between worthwhile investments and other public spending.

    The pennies are not dropping are they, Sir John? You can see it and I am sure that you do have a few like-minded supporters in the chamber that have similar backgrounds and life experiences that can also see it.

    That being said how in hells name have we ended up with what we have got? Because the so-called leaders and senior members of the cabinet do not seem to have their heads in the sunshine. Speaking to a British Rail Operations manager whilst walking the dog yesterday he states that the company is not expecting passenger footfall to increase back to pre covid levels for possibly another 3 years. When asked if that is the case, why are they proceeding with HS2? Reply? Yes, why indeed. 30 years too late with all the changes that have and will come about over covid a total waste of money.
    That is the rub of the whole situation everywhere you look there is waste. Whether it is doing the flat up at No 10, zero-carbon by 2030, too many managers in the NHS, or EVs with no infrastructure to support them. Where have the days gone when projects were properly assessed and costed with the final criteria: can we afford it and does it add value to the business of UKplc?. Nearly all your readers can see it, you can see it, so we cannot all have two left feet and be out of step with the world.
    If the NHS wants extra money for wages put it to the people: This is what we will give them, but (always a but) these are the areas and social departments that will (not might will) have funding reduced to pay for it. when push goes to shove I think the nurses and other staff might get a shock when all the other recipients of taxpayers funding start marching on the streets demanding everyone else can pay as long as it is not them. Change has got to come and time is running out. Storms are coming and there is no one at the helm, it cannot be left to the cabin staff to get us into calmer waters.

  32. Stephen Reay
    March 5, 2021

    I’ve just got this feeling that come the local elections they government will be getting a right kicking.

  33. ian@Barkham
    March 5, 2021

    The EU amuses me. The MsM is making much of the NI Protocol, but everyone has forgotten that the EU has yet to ratify any accord with the UK. They have delayed it once more.

    So as there has NOT been an agreement agreed, what are they even talking about.

    And what ever happened to ‘Nothing is Agreed – until Everything is Agreed’

  34. forthurst
    March 5, 2021

    These are rules designed to enforce non-divergence for members of the Eurozone and convergence for members of the EU who have not yet met all the criteria for joining the Euro, unless the Treasury can produce evidence that these rules are optimal for the UK despite our no longer being in the EU, there is absolutely no reason why any reference should be made to them by the Chancellor.

  35. Everhopeful
    March 5, 2021

    Have we made a Bilateral Agreement about vaccine passports with the EU?
    And is Boris eagerly forging ahead despite the legal minefield this represents?
    And if so…WHY?

  36. Caterpillar
    March 5, 2021

    Need to remain aware that:

    (i) Interest rate – growth differential has been reduced by having anchored inflation, so inflation must not be used as the way to reduce debt.
    (ii) Savings glut in Asia might not go on for ever.
    (iii) Threshold effect of sovereign debt (eventually about 0.05 % increase in gap for every 1% above threshold of 75% debt-GDP ratio, though threshold might be lower). So can add quite quickly.
    (iv) The Q.E. effect on the differential decays, but without clear BoE route to unwind then confidence collapse is a Poisson process of unknown probability.
    (v) And as mentioned yesterday, private mortgage debt eventually crowds out investment and consumption.

    Actually :

    (i) Do need to keep inflation anchored
    (ii) Do need timeline to reduce debt-GDP ratio
    (iii) Do need timeline to unwind QE, and
    (iv) Should immediately stop encouraging the property market and mortgage debt.

    (When I noted yesterday that energy and transport investment can lead to crowding in, it is meant to be energy that enables not disables.)

  37. Lindsay McDougall
    March 5, 2021

    It’s not that 60% and 3% are unreasonable numbers. It’s just that clearly some Civil Servants haven’t accepted that we have left the EU. There is a case for sacking those responsible as a first step in cleansing the Augean stables.

  38. Jackson
    March 5, 2021

    I also see divergence away from the EU with the truck loads of fresh food produce being brought in ships from Ireland to fill the shelves of British owned supermarkets in Belgium- it seems it is easier to do it this way than to put up with the form filling when coming from UK. Just another example of the advantage of going it alone.

Comments are closed.