OBR criticises Cameron?

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

The recession ended when we had positive qtr after previously suffering two consecutive periods of negative growth, that would be 2009, but you knew that didn't you?

Take away the artificial stimulation and the economy isn't rebalancing as was hoped.

DecentLivingWage

This isnt the first time Cameron,the prime minister !! supposedly, has been told off either - remember when he was rebuked for leaking statistics before they were published? I think he's still very much of a newbie ,still trying to learn the ropes after nearly three years - also he's not very good at picking a good economic team - he may have been fed mistruths and misunderstandings by amateurs and underlings. Still, rather up to him as prime minister of what used to be a leading economic nation to rigourously check his output though - before it goes viral !! eg ... who actually wrote that speech? ... red faces... and while we re on the subject ... where is Lynton Crosby? probs hoping not to get noticed after this and Eastleigh. Improved accuracy is a must, particularly with the whole world and markets watching economic speeches!

LauraW10

Wookster wrote: »

I'd be with the OBR if there actually had been austerity.

There has not been any austerity at all however, government spending is still rising!

The Government maintains that spending did in fact fall both in real terms and as a share of GDP last year.

Even if spending rose, this could probably be attributed to the coalition's failed economic policies - if you put people on the dole it costs money - when you lower people's standards of living it costs more in tax credts.

Furthermore, according to the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) The Government 'does not understand the impact of its own spending cuts'". George Osborne's austerity programme of public spending cuts was marred by a short-termist approach and a lack of joined-up thinking across government". Faced with the need to find £200 billion in cuts over four years in the 2010 Spending Review, the Treasury took the axe to those budgets that were easiest to cut, even though they might undermine the Government's stated priority of encouraging growth. The cross-party committee described some spending cuts as "ill thought-through" and said there was "no evidence of clear thinking" about how savings in one Whitehall ministry could impose knock-on costs for other departments. The report cited the decision to slash spending on capital projects from £60 billion to £38 billion in real terms, some of which was later reversed as the Chancellor struggled to inject life into a moribund economy. And the MPs said that staff numbers at the UK Border Agency were cut "too quickly", causing a backlog of immigration case work which resulted in some of the employees having to be rehired. A key message from the Public Accounts Committee is the Government must manage its budgeting with more than just the next 12 months in mind. Cutting spending without looking at the effect on economic growth is incompetent and has led to the economy flat-lining.

Let's face it even the Business Secretary, Vince Cable, is now urging immediate investment in infrastructure to boost jobs and growth.


The real problem for Osborne is that real austerity is only biting on the tax side. The falling pound, which will boost inflation, will do little to help.

Growth (& confidence) - that's what's needed....not more austerity...

Even Jim O'Neill says so....“It seems to me that those nations that have placed most emphasis on long-term fiscal consolidation and not so much focus on cutting debt now are coming out of the 2008 mess better than others.”

DervProf

LauraW10 wrote: »

Growth - that's what's needed....not more austerity...

I agree with the growth bit. More austerity ? That's where the debate begins.

I see it like this.

Under New Labour, national debt was rising during the "good" years. The years when consumer debt was rising quite rapidly, as was HPI. The credit crunch (yes, it was not our fault) meant that some of our banks had to be bailed out to the tune of many billions of pounds, base rates had to be cut dramatically and QE introduced. Proper regulation of our banks may well have minimised the damage cause by the financial crisis, but it would almost certainly have meant that economic growth and HPI between '01 and '07 would not have been so high.

Now, given these "facts", how can the current labour government say that the coalition have got it so wrong, and that they would be able to "put things right" ? It was their previous administration that sowed the seeds for the current situation, and they had a rising defecit, even when the economy was supposed to be doing well ?

How can someone, who ran up a fairly large credit card bill, say that spending a little more on the card, or not paying so much off each month is a good idea ?

I'd like to hear a little more from Milliband and Balls on how exactly they would tackle the problem. I keep hearing that they would reduce the defecit by increasing growth in the economy. Well, they didn't manage it pre '07, so how would they manage it when the global economy is struggling ?

DecentLivingWage

LauraW10 wrote: »

The Government maintains that spending did in fact fall both in real terms and as a share of GDP last year.

Even if spending rose, this could probably be attributed to the coalition's failed economic policies - if you put people on the dole it costs money - when you lower people's standards of living it costs more in tax credts.

Furthermore, according to the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) The Government 'does not understand the impact of its own spending cuts'". George Osborne's austerity programme of public spending cuts was marred by a short-termist approach and a lack of joined-up thinking across government". Faced with the need to find £200 billion in cuts over four years in the 2010 Spending Review, the Treasury took the axe to those budgets that were easiest to cut, even though they might undermine the Government's stated priority of encouraging growth. The cross-party committee described some spending cuts as "ill thought-through" and said there was "no evidence of clear thinking" about how savings in one Whitehall ministry could impose knock-on costs for other departments. The report cited the decision to slash spending on capital projects from £60 billion to £38 billion in real terms, some of which was later reversed as the Chancellor struggled to inject life into a moribund economy. And the MPs said that staff numbers at the UK Border Agency were cut "too quickly", causing a backlog of immigration case work which resulted in some of the employees having to be rehired. A key message from the Public Accounts Committee is the Government must manage its budgeting with more than just the next 12 months in mind. Cutting spending without looking at the effect on economic growth is incompetent and has led to the economy flat-lining.

Let's face it even the Business Secretary, Vince Cable, is now urging immediate investment in infrastructure to boost jobs and growth.


The real problem for Osborne is that real austerity is only biting on the tax side. The falling pound, which will boost inflation, will do little to help.

Growth (& confidence) - that's what's needed....not more austerity...

Even Jim O'Neill says so....“It seems to me that those nations that have placed most emphasis on long-term fiscal consolidation and not so much focus on cutting debt now are coming out of the 2008 mess better than others.”

Yes - and I think there is duplicity here. Cameron's body language says it all - it is very defensive, typical of a boarding school pupil when caught out in a lie and fearful of harsh punishment - answer? Brazen It Out with filibuster and guff and hope no-one notices. trouble is, in a 24 hour speedy news and social media environment , that wont work any more and those who try to con or bend the truth WILL get called out - and much more publicly so than before.

I also think that the speech was duplicitous and hypocritical - I think they Are changing course (because they dont have any choice, they are isolated in their neconomic thinking among financial experts) they Have to! but to save face, they are pretending to Stick To The Plan so Osborne doesnt look like a silly billy. ie - when Carney comes ,the inflation directives are changing,,, can Cameron really hope that no-one will notice in this fast media day and age? How can he be so dense? His u turn will lighted on by hawks and buzzed round the world !!

LauraW10

Wookster wrote: »

I'd be with the OBR if there actually had been austerity.

There has not been any austerity at all however, government spending is still rising!

Just yesterday Robert Chote (OBR) pointed out that the OBR had always asserted that austerity was a drag on growth – shaving 1.4pc off output in 2011/2012 alone - why would he say that if there was no austerity????

See the way I see it - rather than admit that austerity doesn't work you just want to argue that there hasn't been any austerity -

but face it wookster - austerity doesn't work...and neither does denial

wotsthat

DervProf wrote: »

I'd like to hear a little more from Milliband and Balls on how exactly they would tackle the problem. I keep hearing that they would reduce the defecit by increasing growth in the economy. Well, they didn't manage it pre '07, so how would they manage it when the global economy is struggling ?

Why? Milliband and Balls aren't setting policy. Forget wondering what Balls would do - it's going to be at least two years before his policies matter.

David Cameron spent quite a few minutes saying nothing and it turns out even some of that was, arguably, factually incorrect.

I'd prefer the government to take the high ground and clearly explain what they are doing and why. It would be lovely if following the explanation I didn't have to spend time trying to translate what they say into what they mean.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Wookster wrote: »

I'd be with the OBR if there actually had been austerity.

There has not been any austerity at all however, government spending is still rising!

Which tells you that austerity has failed.....as predicted by many....

DecentLivingWage

Are you sure???? We might not be mid-term....

Wait til 21st March !

(Ladbrokes now 5/1 Cameron will be thrown out by own party!)

Or didnt you know about all the letters?

DervProf

wotsthat wrote: »

I'd prefer the government to take the high ground and clearly explain what they are doing and why. It would be lovely if following the explanation I didn't have to spend time trying to translate what they say into what they mean.

Seems clear to me that they are reducing public spending in certain areas in order to reduce the rate at which the national debt is rising.

I think there's too much "we want the good times back, and we want it now".

This government don't have the advantage of banks having access to plenty of "funny money".

Liam Byrne left a warning, did he not ?