Hamish McRae: Politics only confuses economics
The best that can be expected by next summer is an uncertain recovery
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
The politics are horrid and are going to get worse in the coming months. The economics are horrid and... well, let's test the evidence before concluding that things will get worse, for the arguments there are much more finely balanced. The politics are horrid because you have a government fighting for its life and, therefore, pushing forward every problem into an uncertain future. So it will not reveal details of future spending plans until after the election; it conceals the fact that it is actually giving less of an additional fiscal boost to the economy than most other countries are doing; and it fails to acknowledge that there would have been an unsustainable fiscal deficit even there had been the mildest of recessions, rather than a really nasty one. As for the Opposition, well it dare not come into the open about the scale of the public spending disaster because the consequences, initially at least, will be too painful for the electorate to acknowledge.
The reality is that, after the election, whoever wins it, the policies that the next government will have to adopt will be pretty much the same. It will take two terms of Parliament to bring the nation's finances back under control, for the problem is too big to be corrected in one. Alistair Darling acknowledges this, even if Gordon Brown won't. There is a harsh economic reality that overrides politics, and no amount of spin can alter that.
This is going to go on and on until the election. Those of us who hate it just have to grit our teeth and wait. If you want to know what is really happening to public finances, try to tune out the noise from Westminster and listen instead to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the OECD, the IMF and the various other responsible bodies that sit outside British politics. Come the election, the central issue will be which party is best able to reform government, transforming it into something that is leaner, more competent and more responsive to what people want.
There is a further issue, however, one that we have mercifully managed to avoid in all elections since 1992. Since then, elections have been underpinned by the sense that the economy is pretty sound. In 1997, the implicit deal that Tony Blair presented to the people was that Labour would not mess up the economy but would use its strength to improve public services. Now that comfortable backcloth is swept away. The best that can realistically be expected by next summer will be an uncertain recovery, while the worst does not bear thinking about. Right now, there is the classic mixture of confusing data you always get at this stage of the economic cycle. We are getting confirmation that in the first quarter of the year things were really dreadful, worse even than we thought. The revised GDP figures show that the economy contracted by 2.4 per cent, the worst three months for 51 years. They also confirm that it started earlier, in the second quarter of last year, not the third.
But if you go down fast, you are likely to bounce back and at least two forecasters I respect, Capital Economics and Global Insight, note that the economy will stabilise and may even have grown in the quarter that ended yesterday. Certainly, the British consumer seems to have recovered some confidence and the housing market looks as though it may have bottomed.
So end of recession? If it were, this recession would have turned out to be unusually short, just 12 months, compared with the 18 months or more in previous cycles. But I do think it is quite likely we will get some sort of bounce through the autumn; it feels as though some business confidence has seeped back and, remember, the economy is boosted by the ultra-competitive sterling, even if that makes our foreign holidays a more expensive operation in sterling terms.
But next year? The threat of a W-shaped recession, when we get a small uplift but then slide back into a second downward leg, was articulated by my colleague Sean O'Grady in this newspaper yesterday; that must be a real possibility. I think I am even more concerned, though, about what might be called the burden on recovery: the extent to which resources will have to be switched out of consumption into paying back debt.
There are at least five reasons to expect a lacklustre recovery by previous standards. Firstly and most obviously, there is the surge in public debt. Leave aside whether this surge was a sensible response to a global crisis or a reckless attempt by government to conceal its incompetence, just focus on the effect. By going from less than 40 per cent of GDP to about 90 per cent, interest costs more than double. Add in a gradual programme of repayment, and a huge wodge of money that would have been available for regular public spending has to go in coping with the debt. That is an inevitable and unavoidable drag on growth.
Secondly, the international financial services industry, on many measures the main driver of growth in the UK, will take some time to recover its buoyancy. So we lose power from that engine. Third, North Sea oil and gas are in decline, so one of the other drivers of growth for the past 30 years will gradually fade in importance.
Fourth, there is our own personal indebtedness. Savings have come up a little and borrowers have benefited from ultra-low interest rates, but rates will have to come up. We cannot for social, moral or economic reasons continue to cane savers. As rates come up, more personal resources will have to go into servicing debt rather than supporting consumer growth.
And finally, adverse demography is starting to take its toll. We are not yet facing a fall in the size of our workforce, unlike Germany and Japan, but we have to cope with retirement of the baby boomers, which is just starting to happen now as people born just after the Second World War reach their 60s. So this will be the first recovery to be held back by demographic factors.
Of course, even a lacklustre recovery is better than none. And it is just possible, just, that when all is done and dusted, the quarter that ended yesterday will be seen as the bottom of this cycle. But we have a mountain to climb and I wish our politicians would level with us just how long that trudge will take and how hard it will be.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Hasn't this always been the dream? Since when have the people been listened to, when the elections are over?
I cannot think when it was that, the people "wanted" two Corporate mercenary wars on which to spend their billions of taxes, rather than a modern Health Service, Education, Housing and fair Pensions for those who have spent years working to pay their squandered taxes.
MPs only respond to self-serving needs and self advancement careers, so let's not pretend they are there to serve the people, or that, an election is a kind of exorcism to rid vice.
The first three paragraphs are ok but beyond that you are just expressing regret that it is such a mess. Interest rates won't just have to rise because artificially low rates are unfair on savers - they will have to rise because we will have a bout of lively inflation starting later this year as a result of more commodities speculation, a weak £, and the re-application of 17.5% vat (this on its own will increase non-foods by +2.1%). In fact CPI has been above the 2% target for months anyway. Quantitative easing is being wasted to a large extent - £22bn of gilts were bought by the BoE from foreigners in the last 3 months, so foreign investors who the UK depends on to fund it's humungous borrowing obviously don't see the UK as a good bet, and at the same time that was £22bn of 'printed money' which went outside the UK to other economies. Adjusted M4 money supply is only increasing by a few percent despite all the QE expansion when it needs to be 6-7% to give the boost required. So that will encourage the BoE to prolong QE which will stoke inflation further in due course. It'll be a long hard road, made worse by over-optimistic journalists, estate agents, politicians, think-tanks and all the rest who have called green shoots too early because they all have their own axe to grind. The only one to believe is the IFS.
Aside from this being a long W-shaped recovery, what really worries me is if (when) we have another recession within the normal 7-10 year cycle. The recession that should have happened around 2000 didn't happen then, because of the millenium optimism and the masking of the real state of western economies by excessive credit-fuelled spend, and therefore excessive debt (which was apparent in the UK then to anyone looking as the monthly personal debt figures). So we are now having two recessions in one. And I just can't see that we will have paid down Brown's debt legacy in 8 years as well as rebuilt a Keynes-like surplus to see us through the next recession in normal cycle....Politics confused economics from 1997, but no one was looking. The consequence will be higher taxes than we all expect, and larger spending cuts than those that aren't yet being revealed.
Two solutions either government defaults on the debt or pays it off. How does it pay it of - raise taxes, cuts spending or both. Either way the short term boost of all this public spending with end in 12-18 months.
I will add that none of this has cleared all that personal debt that was built up. Anyone hoping for a V or W shaped out is being very hopeful. I think this Ln_ is more likely over the next 3-4 years.
The Green Party, god bless them, has a very good Monetary Policy that actually involves creating money for the benefit of the economy instead of finance.