We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Treasury Committee Head - National Debt not the most important thing

baby_boomer
baby_boomer Posts: 3,883 Forumite
Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
edited 26 April 2009 at 12:51PM in Debate House Prices & the Economy
Guardian -
False debate over the national debt is distracting us from human face of crisis


Maybe John McFall should move away from his national role of holding the Treasury to account for its budgetary deceptions over our public finances and accept a lesser role on a social affairs committee where he can be true to his beliefs?

He's good a grandstanding against bankers, but in the midst of this financial crisis we need a steady and impartial hand on the tiller.

It's such a shame that in the UK our legislative committees are so weak at holding the government to account.
«1

Comments

  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Seems a statement of the obvious... the national debts is only one factor albiet an important one in the life of the country.

    It would, after all seem, that the debt as a percentage of GDP will be less than that after the second world war... we did indeed recover from that.

    I'm not sure what an 'impartial hand' is.. although I am currently available if that helps (I would need over £150k (so I could feel the pain of the 50% tax) and also a second home allowance ...
  • CLAPTON wrote: »
    It would, after all seem, that the debt as a percentage of GDP will be less than that after the second world war... we did indeed recover from that.


    We only finished paying that money back a couple of years ago!
    Not Again
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    We only finished paying that money back a couple of years ago!


    Exactly my point....

    We didn't simply say the most important thing was to address the 'war' debt issue, instead we had a sensible balance that involved, over those 64 years, in spending money on education, NHS, roads, railways, infrastructure, social services in general etc.etc. and allowed people to spend their money on houses, cars, holidays, sport, entertainment etc etc
    exactly as it should be.
  • baby_boomer
    baby_boomer Posts: 3,883 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    There are other political issues to be sure.

    To clarify, I think the debate over the National Debt that McFall - as Treasury Select Committee Chairman - needs to prioritise is:

    "How big is the National Debt going to be?" and what is the long term strategy for bringing it under control (apart from "hopeful" growth forecasts)?

    Alternatively we could just leave it up to the financial markets & the IMF to trash the £ and save money on his new allowance as head of this committee.
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    There are other political issues to be sure.

    To clarify, I think the debate over the National Debt that McFall - as Treasury Select Committee Chairman - needs to prioritise is:

    "How big is the National Debt going to be?" and what is the long term strategy for bringing it under control (apart from "hopeful" growth forecasts)?

    Alternatively we could just leave it up to the financial markets & the IMF to trash the £ and save money on his new allowance as head of this committee.


    It's not the role of the treasury select committee to decide financial policy but only to hold the executive to account.

    There can be no realistic policy longer than 1 year, unless you think the Labout will win the next election.
  • CLAPTON wrote: »
    Exactly my point....

    We didn't simply say the most important thing was to address the 'war' debt issue, instead we had a sensible balance that involved, over those 64 years, in spending money on education, NHS, roads, railways, infrastructure, social services in general etc.etc. and allowed people to spend their money on houses, cars, holidays, sport, entertainment etc etc
    exactly as it should be.


    Lets hope there is not another "proper" war then......

    But at least if anyone threatens to invade us they will have some nice roads to drive their tanks down & some good infrastructure to bus their troops around.

    As for Education etc.. Do you know that alot of the building projects are on hold because the Government agency dealing with it has run out of funds? & the same goes for hospitals because the PFI isnt an intiative for the private sector anymore..

    Sounds like you have been conned..
    Not Again
  • Cannon_Fodder
    Cannon_Fodder Posts: 3,980 Forumite
    Education being mentioned reminded me of the weekend's "Primary Academies" story.

    Was I the only one who heard Children's Minister Beverley Hughes say:

    "The costs of this would be very large indeed, and of course at a time when the Tories are going to have to cut school budgets anyway, I think schools will be worried about the impact on their budgets."


    And thought....that this was the first admission from the Govt that cuts will follow, and it will be the Tories in power...?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8018281.stm
  • I am getting bemused by the amount of frothing over national debt. You'd think that coming out of recession with less debt than our competitor 1st world economies is a bad thing. Yes, we'll have 80% debt. Still less than Germany or America or Japan. And still substantially less than we had for decades of the latter half of the 20th Century when the sky didn't fall in either.

    Debt has just gone up 40% and will take up to 20 years or so to pay off. Debt went up 20% in the last recession and took a decade to pay off. And investment continued and the sky didn't fall in then either.
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Lets hope there is not another "proper" war then......

    But at least if anyone threatens to invade us they will have some nice roads to drive their tanks down & some good infrastructure to bus their troops around.

    As for Education etc.. Do you know that alot of the building projects are on hold because the Government agency dealing with it has run out of funds? & the same goes for hospitals because the PFI isnt an intiative for the private sector anymore..

    Sounds like you have been conned..


    I'm not sure what point you are making.

    It's a reasonably demonstratable fact that under both Labour and Conservative governments, investment was make in education, road, etc, etc since 1945 .... is that really controversial?

    If you're saying that PFI is nonsense, then I agree, as it always was simply an accounting device to transfer capital projects (and so public sector debt) to a revenue stream (with very bad return) with no transfer of risk to the private sector.

    If you say that investment in new building for schools is now stopping then that's true too.
    But that doesn't mean the end of the the world or even of the relative prosperity of the UK.
  • A couple of points..

    Firstly if we had another war now we couldnt easily afford to build any weapons.

    Secondly PFIs arent working at the moment because business dont want to invest.

    Thirdly the education & infrastructure projects are having promised funding withdrawn.

    The billions mentioned on infrastructure is simply to pay for old contracts & 2012.

    Darling & Brown have financed us for decades to pay for old projects, coal power stations & a few nuclear.
    Not Again
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.