Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


It's all pain and no gain until 2032, say experts

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 24 April 2009
THE UK's finances may not return to good health until 2032 because of the "breathtaking" damage caused by the credit crunch, it was claimed yesterday.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), giving the first independent and authoritative analysis of this week's Budget, warned of "two parliaments of pain" as taxes rose and public services were slashed up to 2018.

It said every government departme
nt would have budget cuts of 2.3 per cent a year on average for three years – the toughest conditions since the early 1970s. The only exception would be the Department for International Development, which provides UK aid to the Third World.

The IFS calculated that the changes introduced by Alistair Darling this week, and in his Pre-Budget Report (PBR) in November, would generate around £90 billion a year to trim the national debt. By 2017-18, this would be the equivalent of sending every family in Britain an annual bill for £2,840.

But the biggest shock was the IFS's prediction that it will not be until 27 February, 2032 – dubbed "Darling debt freedom day" – that the level of national debt would return to 40 per cent of national income. This was one of the precious fiscal rules Gordon Brown introduced as chancellor, and which Mr Darling was forced to abandon last year as he increased spending in an attempt to halt the recession.

In his Budget speech on Wednesday, the Chancellor announced borrowing of £703 billion over the next five years – the highest since the Second World War – which will take the percentage of debt to GDP above 76 per cent by 2013-14.

The IFS, a respected think-tank, warned that the 50p income tax rate introduced for people earning more than £150,000 a year may not raise any extra revenue. Despite Treasury hopes it would generate £3 billion in its first two years – it is due to be implemented next April – the IFS said the 50p rate might actually result in a lower VAT yield as high-earners spent less. There was also the likelihood that a number of high earners were likely to dodge the tax or leave the country.

The IFS discovered that the Budget book contained no information on how the Treasury would generate £90 billion of cuts and tax rises from 2014 – prompting the Conservatives to claim the figures contained a giant "black hole".

IFS director Robert Chote said: "The Treasury's assessment of the fiscal damage wrought by the current economic and financial crisis is breathtaking."

He added it would require "two full parliaments of mounting austerity" to start to repair the public finances. But he warned the scale of the recession was such that it had caused permanent damage to the UK economy, equivalent to around £90 billion a year in lost tax revenues and higher social security costs.

And with new taxes only due to cover 10 per cent of the extra revenue sought by the Treasury by 2017-18, Mr Chote warned the main burden was likely to fall on people who used public services, such as health, education and transport. He added: "The Chancellor has laid out a broad-brush plan to deal with the problem, but with most of the detail – notably where the cuts will fall within public services – yet to be filled in." Shadow chancellor George Osborne said the IFS research proved that Mr Darling had failed to explain how half of the £2,840 per family cost of restoring the public finances would be carried out after 2014.

The IFS said that, under the Chancellor's plans, an average family would pay an extra £300 a year in tax and lose the equivalent of £690 a year in current government spending and £420 a year in investment spending – leaving an unfunded gap of £1,430.

Mr Osborne said: "This secret tax bombshell of £1,430 was not even announced by the Chancellor on Wednesday. It shows what a dishonest Budget it was."

Last night, Downing Street said it was puzzled by the IFS's calculations as they appeared to convert government savings into a "cost" for families.

The Prime Minister's spokesman said: "It's quite difficult at this time to give a considered response. It's not clear to us why you would count an efficiency saving as a cost to a family."



POLL BOOST

THE Conservatives' poll lead has stretched to 18 points in the wake of the Budget, it was revealed last night. The poll put Conservative support at 45 per cent – up four points – while Labour was down by the same amount on 27 per cent. The Lib Dems were backed by 18 per cent.

Meanwhile, a YouGov poll commissioned by the SNP on voting intentions for Holyrood constituencies put the SNP at 37 per cent and Labour at 30 per cent.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 24 April 2009 12:51 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: The Budget , Recession
 
1

RufusT-Firefly,

24/04/2009 00:00:58
Looks like Labour's policies are working.

The VAT Cut was a success..........................

From the BBC

Cut in VAT 'boosts retail sales'


The government's much-criticised cut in VAT is working and has led to a big boost in consumer spending, according to a leading economics consultancy.

The Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) says that the cut, which took effect on 1 December 2008, has led to £2.1bn of extra sales.

The centre says the growth in retail spending is "remarkable".

It argues that the temporary cut of 2.5%, which expires in January 2010, should be extended for six months.

'Immediate boost'

"The figures are clear; the VAT cut is working," the CEBR said.

"There was an immediate boost to the volume of retail sales after the cut was introduced.


2

RufusT-Firefly,

24/04/2009 00:01:19
Looks like Labour's policies are working.

Quantatitive Easing is a success..........................



From ITN

Quantitative Easing signs 'encouraging'
There has been "encouraging" early signs from the £75 billion quantitative easing programme, according to Bank of England policymakers.

The Bank said it is encouraged by the initial impact of the £26.5 billion of assets bought so far under the unprecedented scheme which is designed to create new money and increase the flow of lending to households and businesses

3

truthsleuth,

24/04/2009 00:25:58
POOR Gordon and Alistair
THe enormous cost is the bailing out of the banks.
The banks were in a mess because they were basically involved in fraud.
They gave loans to those who basically could not afford them.
So the people who consistantly moan about GB and AD were complicit in fraud in that they took loans they could not afford many of them by making false declarations to get the loan.

PS Remember it was you who voted in Gordon AND Alistair and the major Scottish banks were major players in the events for which many of us will be out of work and many others will lose much of their pension if not worse.
4

,

24/04/2009 00:39:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Brianwci,

24/04/2009 00:52:04
This is the strongest argument yet to get Scotland out of this failed union and into the sunshine of an OIL, GAS, Wind and Wave powered Independent Scotland.

And it would appear that the voters think so too according to YouGov and Scottish Opinion polls yesterday.

Poor Rufus, SM et al. All that barking and howling at the moon and where does it get them? Slipping further behind the SNP in the polls.
6

RufusT-Firefly,

24/04/2009 01:10:49
9 Wardog, How are car sales doing?

That was all that the VAT cut affected wasn't it (according to your imbecilic postings yesterday).



BREATHTAKING STUPIDITY!
7

Castaway™ ,

24/04/2009 01:11:18
#1 Yes the VAT cut was a success....................UK unemployment reaches 2.1m on Darling's budget day.22 April 2009

Wasteful VAT cut only benefiting the rich

The Government’s VAT cut is benefiting the richest households the most, figures highlighted by the Liberal Democrats have revealed. The richest households will save around £1.2bn from the Government’s VAT cut, while the poorest 10% will only save an estimated £360m.

The savings work out at an average of over £9 a week for the richest households, while poorer households are saving less than £3, despite recent claims from Gordon Brown that families would save at least £5 a week.

Pensioners are among the worst hit by the cut, with the poorest households saving only £2 a week while the richest save almost £7.

"Its benefits have been overstated and most of the money is not helping the poorer households that are struggling in the recession.

This ineffectual VAT cut is costing £1bn a month.

7th Apr 2009::::http://tinyurl.com/c273o3
8

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 24/04/2009 01:55:51
#1 Rufus

Did you even read the article? It says 'THE UK's finances may not return to good health until 2032 because of the "breathtaking" damage caused by the credit crunch, it was claimed yesterday.'

And you are hysterically happy about the problematical success of the minor VAT cut. Get some perspective.
9

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 02:26:08

Now let me work this one out!

Will I have reached my 103rd Birthday, with all the 'Babes', chasing me, at my front door, in the Year 2032?

Wait a Mo!, while I do the maths!, tic-toc, tic-toc, tic-toc,

'GOOD NEWS'!, NO I WILL NOT!

SO!, All you 'Honey-Pies', your Charles, will have Paid-Back, some or the UK's Debt, and will still have Money,, and be young-enough, to entertain you!

YOU SEE MY FRIENDS, IT IS NOT ALL,...'DOOM AND GLOOM'!


10

,

24/04/2009 03:04:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

,

24/04/2009 03:09:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

,

24/04/2009 03:11:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

,

24/04/2009 03:17:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
14

blackops,

24/04/2009 05:31:00
Rufus - you are an idiot. Labour is dead. Gone. They have destroyed the country with misunderstanding and ineffective policies which we will all now be penalised for. Darling has only made this worse in his budget by pushing high income earners away. Whereas we may not like people making over 150K a year the fact is a lot of this people have their own businesses employnig others and generally helping the economy turn over - to penalise this and drive them away is as idiotic as Rufus.
15

Jim A,

24/04/2009 06:39:22
Aye y'know Rufus, I don't think your lads are going to survive the next election, too many peeved off people out here. Watching the banks getting bailed out with taxpayers money then evicting some of those same people because they are three months behind with the mortgage payments. We helped them, but do they the return the compliment? No they slap us in the face and laugh at us. More fool us.
16

Jimmy Le Pie,

24/04/2009 07:31:16
I'm surprised that our resident Irish statistician/censor, O'Poison, hasn't been on here telling us how the polls put Comrade Broon 16 points ahead, that Alex Salmond trails Iain Grey by 90 points, and that all is well with our glorious union and empire!!

God Save Comrade Broon!!
17

Bigwull,

edinburgh 24/04/2009 08:03:22
Wait a minute here does this take into account selling the bank shares for 6 times what was paid out for them when the worlds economy picks up, or are these experts banking on a Tory victory and these shares being sold to a few on the cheap? Is this the same bunch of experts that were telling us everything in the garden is rosy a couple of years ago?
18

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 24/04/2009 08:07:22
"There will be no more boom and bust"

Yup, got that right. Just bust now.
19

Alan B,

24/04/2009 08:41:09
#Rufus

Quantitive easing was the correct policy under the circumstances. The problem with brown was he dithered over it and only followed the US lead much later.

But the thing you neglect to say is that Brown has been the cause of the UK being in such a bad situation.

The need for quantitive easing was due to massive contraction in the money supply. The cause of Britains underlying problem was that Brown failed to control the money supply over his decade as chancellor.

If Brown had realised the importance of the money supply and its effect on the economy over the past decade we would not be in such a serious situation now.

It is pretty basic economics.

Eddie George who was the govenor of the BOE for some of this time who died recently said that the uk deliberately expanded the money supply more than was sustainable. While there was an argument for that in the late 90s the problem the uk faced is Brown allowed that to continue until our whole financial system has collapsed.

We have never had another chancellor who has so deliberately sold out the economic fundamentals for power.

20

Jambo-ree,

24/04/2009 08:49:29
#19 - Do you honestly believe that a significant number of higher earners are going to go to the inconvenience, trouble and cost of upping sticks to live in another country to avoid paying a miserly additional 10p in the pound in tax?

Didn't happen when the rules on residency changed and won't happen now. If Darling wants to send me an invoice for my share of £2840 for my family then I'd be happy to pay him now. But there again, I'm being patriotic, not like these greedy tax dodging high rollers.
21

Marian,

24/04/2009 08:53:38
History shows that every time we have had a Labour government their term in office has ended with an economic crisis due to economic mismanagement - it happened in 1951 after Atlee and again in 1979 after Callaghan and now here we go again.

The Tories claimed at the 1997 general election that a Labour government of the UK would end in higher taxes due to their chronic propensity to "spend spend spend" like bairns in a sweetie shop. At that time Blair and Brown said that would not happen as Labour had changed and would behave responsibly. Millions of voters were taken in and we got a New Labour government that did behave responsibly for a few years before their old ways caught up with them and the "spend spend spend" started again.

Trouble was that Labour forgot the first rule of housekeeping which is not to spend more than you earn. This is the reason why the UK is in far worse economic shape than the rest of the G20 countries. Brown borrowed heavily during the good years to fund his extravagant life style policies and now we the people are paying the price. Other counties put money aside for a rainy day, but not Brown and so here we are with an economic mill stone around our necks for at least 10 years.

We can only hope and trust that this time voters will learn this lesson from history and consign Labour to the dustbin of history forever when the next UK general election comes.
22

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 09:13:16
26 Bigwull
The govt bought its equity in RBS for 65p a share. The current price is 32p so the govt have already lost billions in terms of asset valuation.

If you think that the share price will goup to 6 times the price at which they were bought (i.e. rise to about 400p) you should muster all the money you can and buy RBS shares. According to your comments, you would make a profit of over 1000%.
23

Salthorse,

RWAV 24/04/2009 09:14:38
It won't last until 2032 if we get Independence.

SH
24

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 09:17:31
30 Marian
You are absolutely right with your judgement of Labour govts. The problem we have is that many seem to believe that the huge level of debt has been caused by the bail-out of the banks. This is not the case. The effect of the bank bail-outs is minimal compared to the debt incurred by Labour's profligate spending.
25

Alan B,

24/04/2009 09:19:04
#Jambo

While I understand your sentiments the problems is will a 50% rate increase the tax take by much or is it just a gimic.

When the tax rate was cut from 60% to 40% the tax take increased.

The question really is not the short term but the long term effect. What will the effect be on the city which so much of the uk economy is realient? What will the effect be on where companies locate headquarters?

I do not think it is really a question of people leaving the country to go abroad for tax reasons but whether they manage there tax in a different way to avoid tax. There is so much legal tax avoidance at the moment allowed by the government, that changes in the top rate does look as if it is just a political ploy.
26

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 09:21:07
32 Salthorse.
Oh but it would. If Scotland became independent it would have to accept responsibility for a proportinate share of UK national debt. This would amount to approx £100bn.
27

Alan B,

24/04/2009 09:21:56
#Jambo

Also remember labour comments when the top tax take was 40%. They said an increase of 3% in scotland would cause a massive flight of capital and this paper were full of quoting the CBI and everyone they could muster to tell us how a 43% top rate would turn scotland into an economic disaster zone.
28

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 24/04/2009 09:25:48
35

What would happen if an Independent Scotland said "nope, we're no paying up".
29

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 24/04/2009 09:27:19
35

Proportional share of debt. What about proportional share of blame? Who allowed the madmen sir Fred et al to go wild?
30

Ugly George,

24/04/2009 09:27:31
34 Alan B
Indeed so. To put the 50% rate into perspective, the Czech Republic has introduced a flat tax of 15% on all income.

If you consider the much maligned hedge fund manager with his £1m bonus, he could set up his operation in Prague and be £350,000 p.a. better off. He could fly back each weekend, stay in a £1000 a night suite in Claridges, sit next to Roman Abramovitch with his Chelsea season ticket and still be much better off.
31

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 09:34:31
38 Dave
Two points:
A proportionate share of blame would not be a factor in the calculation. The Convention of Vienna which has set up procedures for such events does not take that into account.

But also, the main people in charge of the UK economy are Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling who both represent Scottish constituencies in the UK parliament. The logical interpretation of your point would be that Scotland should accept a greater proportion of the blame as the two main culprits were elected by people in Scotland.
32

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 09:43:13
37
That would not really be viable and would mean that an independent Scotland would be taken to court by bondholders. It would also be impossible to raise finance on the world bond markets so it would be impossible to borrow any more.

National debt is raised by selling UK bonds. If Scotland became independent then the UK would no longer exist so the liabilities incurred by the UK would have to be split into the component parts.

Think of a couple getting divorced. If they have an joint account with an overdraft then both are liable for it. The same principle applies.
33

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 24/04/2009 09:44:41
41

We won't pay. Then what? Lock us up?
34

drunken proffet,

Tassy 24/04/2009 10:26:33
Well you would most likely reduce that to about 2018 if you tackled the high cost of government in the UK. You could compare it with the cost per head of governance in the USA. However like any easy solution it does not work. With the way that the industrial and retail bases are going, the workforce is better working for the government than not working at all. I would sell anything that was not bolted down to the Chinese, and ask your lodgers to go back home.
35

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 10:30:14
42 Dave
The court of arbitration could give bondholders from other countries the power to seize Scottish assets as compensation for default. Some countries might do this anyway.

That could mean that any oil, whisky etc leaving Scotland could be seized. So trade with other countries could become impossible.

Also what would Scotland do for a currency. It would not be accepted by another central bank in these circumstances. It would have to print its own but who is going to accept a currency with £100bn of unallocated liability behind it.

And how would finance be raised. Who is going to lend to a country which refuses to meet is liabilities?
36

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 10:47:44
42 Dave
PS
Do you have any premium bonds. Buying premium bonds is just a way of lending money to the UK govt.

If you have £1000 in premium bonds these could end up being split up as £85 in Scottish premium bonds and £915 in rest of UK premium bonds.

If Scotland did not honour its premium bonds then you would have been defrauded out of £85.

Now consider pension/investment funds worldwide which may hold £millions in UK bonds. Not honouring the liability would be defrauding £millions out of peoples' pension funds. That is why they would take steps to recover it by court action if necessary.
37

Arfur,

24/04/2009 11:14:48
I have never incountered such an idiot as Rufus. You know i actually think he really does believe the guff he is handed by his Labour lords while he takes a pounding from behind. So so sad.
38

Allan(handofgod137),

24/04/2009 11:18:14
Recession is when your neighbour loses his job.

Depression is when you lose your job.

Recovery is when Gordon f@ck1ng Brown loses his.
39

mike teulon,

uk 24/04/2009 12:24:35
This is just too sloppy - yesterday it was widely reported by the media that the economic chaos will end in 2032 on 27th February but no mention at all was made as to at what time on that day . Come on you journos some of us like to plan ahead !
40

Tartan Viking,

24/04/2009 12:32:57
#1. Roofarse.

You are a complete idiot and should be locked up. No recovery until the year 2032 and you are gloating about a party that has brought this country to its knees!! You are indeed an @rse of the first order.
41

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 12:37:43
48 mike
Maybe the fact that 2032 will be a leap year is confusing the calculation
42

Jimmy Le Pie,

24/04/2009 12:48:34
Will Britishness Day be held when we're clear of Comrade Broon's depression??

Or will GB be a distant memory???
43

Hugh Roscombe,

24/04/2009 13:31:25
2032

I shall be too old and senile to care.
44

Mcsnagpile,

24/04/2009 13:51:43
By 2032 we will be out of oil there will be nearly 9 billion people in the world. There will be a fast foods American museum in Edinburgh with mouldy pieces of pizza and plastic replicas of double Macs. “Hey Da did ye really eat that stuff in the old days”, “Aye an the triple bypass cost a fortune”.
People will be hanging around Leith docks with spotted hankies on their heads waiting for the next pirate ship departure to the Caribbean. Leith Pirate Nautical College will be back whole and hearty me lads..
45

Alan B,

24/04/2009 13:56:46
#Hugh

The price of spending money we did not have for the last decade is financial pain for the next couple of decades. Brown must have misread the definition of "prudence" when mandelson told him is was a good buzz word to repeat.
46

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 24/04/2009 15:02:34
The UK might linger on till 2032 although it's a treatable economic disease we'd be better without. It's showed all the symptoms of capitalism, imperialism, communism, monetarism, and futilism may be its terminal stage.

Alba confracta. Onwards the Republic!
47

Pict,

Edinburgh 24/04/2009 17:06:28
Lets take our £100b share of the debt before it gets much much bigger and jump off this sinking ship. We'd get an economic boost from renewed confidence as happens to newly independent nations.

We can act faster than this bumbling London Labour to develop our new Carbon capture and renewable energy projects as has already been proved.

Lets show we are not a 'feeble little country' as racist David Starky described us on Question time
48

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 24/04/2009 17:54:30
There is one up side to all this.

Labour has had a passion for big government (ID cards, meddling in peoples life at every level etc). This all costs money. Since we are now broke perhaps there will be a resurgence of small, non intrusive government, spending only on essentials.

Also since the TV licence is designated as a tax (In January 2006 the Office of National Statistics re-classified the licence fee as a tax) we can scrap this tax and instead use the equivalent on necessary services.

Getting rid of bloated, intrusive government would be a silver lining.
49

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 24/04/2009 18:02:19
Private banks have always created money out of nothing and they like lending to governments as they have the power to compell their citizens to pay the interest. It's called the IRS.

The "West" is now sinking because their making money out of money fixation shows no real goods on the ground.

The UK's trillion £ debt is only a number on a computer. It doesn't relate to anything real.

It's worth worrying about when you see it what it is.
50

Jimmy Le Pie,

24/04/2009 19:19:18
There is a good link on Guido's site that takes you to a 10 Downing Street petition asking Comrade Broon to resign!

Go on sign it, you know it makes sense!!!

http://www.order-order.com/
51

Me Bungo Pony,

Dundee 24/04/2009 20:11:04
#35 Ugly George wrote;
"If Scotland became independent it would have to accept responsibility for a proportinate share of UK national debt. This would amount to approx £100bn."
==============
Yes, an Independent Scotland would have to take around £100bn of the massive debt run up by the UK, but would be better placed to deal with it. Scotland was reckoned to be in fiscal surplus in 2008 (I'm told GERS confirms this) .... despite the UK heading for a record pre-crunch deficit of £50bn. With our stronger starting position (relative to the UK), we would be able to start paying off the debt almost immediately while the rest of the UK would still be amassing it. We can remain in the Union and be dragged further into the mire .... or embrace Independence and haul ourselves out of it in double quick time :)
52

Observer,,

Glasgow 24/04/2009 22:15:54
2032 That's alright then. I've only got the rest of my working life to help pay back Brown's debt then. A pound for me, a pound for him. That will put a spring in my step each morning.
53

the reporter,

Godalming , Surrey, 26/04/2009 10:59:53
February 27th , 2032, very precise, even down to the day in question ! Does that mean we should all have flags and the decorations in store ready for the big day ?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.