Fiscal tweaks won’t solve Britain’s growth problem
Open the Editor’s Marking Free
Rulla Khalaf, the FT editor, chooses its preferred stories in this week’s news.
The last Wednesday in the spring statement, the exchange Chancellor Reches did the right thing. Confronted as predicted with worse predictions Office for Budget Responsibility than the last OctoberThe government will have spending and income plans, aims to restore HBR judges who have lost its fiscal targets. This was reasonable. No
Because I be discussed Two weeks ago, the world has changed significantly, no less important to have a need to significantly increase defense expenses significantly. In this context, the government should ask him if it is necessary to reconsider some of its independent taxes on taxes and expenses. Wider as Andy Halda He argued that there is a bit to make revenues and expenses in response to changes in very uncertain predictions. It would be wiser to have less fiscal measures, as well as set targets and predictions to produce results, not inevitably with the evaluation of the wrong item.
Obr process, however, offers a different chance. This should be a secure external assessment of the impact of structural reforms in the government. Such reforms are now needed, taking into account the miserable economic performance of Great Britain. Really, as my partner Chris Greens In his comments on the spring statement, the latter is far from the biggest economic economic problem. Disappointment is on frustration because slow growth continues. During 2019-2024, the economy expanded by only 3.4%. Worse, in 2024, wide economic productivity increased by only 4.4%.
As long as the growth remains so slow, no caution will solve the hardships of the UK, including its tax. The stagnant economy is also a “zero money” economy in which more inevitably means less for others. Such a policy of such economy should be pregnant. Eventually, or fiscal discipline or democracy is likely to collapse.
Therefore, it is necessary to expand the potential of the economy. One of the government’s ideas to do this is undoubtedly good, it is better to build more houses and infrastructures. OBR provides former interesting analysis. The verdict is that it will help, but not as much as one can hope or economy.
Thus, the Central Forecast of OBR is that “the funded net supplements of the housing fund are under $ 2029-30. We appreciate this 170,000 supplements, residential GDP. ” As always, there are great uncertainties in such predictions. Capacity constraints. Lack of skilled employees, a powerful opposition to the construction or obstacles created by a judicial review, may be more compulsory than expected. However, it is also possible to imagine that other improvement of scale or efficiency can lead to greater supply expansions.
The expansion of supply in the “low scenario” in OBR is 100,000 points lower than central forecasts. “High scenario”, however, it is 100,000 than central forecast. The corresponding GDP growth is 0.1 and 0.3%. The growth of housing supplies compared to what would happen without new means, the prices will be modestly low than they would have been otherwise. OBR also implies that economic benefits will be built over time, as people are moving to more efficient areas. However, a much larger household program than it will be necessary to reset the availability of sharp roof and low prices.
This suggests that the government should be much more radical if it significantly improves growth prospects. Dramatic reductions are needed at the cost of building infrastructure. Drain improvements are also needed in the productivity of the public sector. Special attention should be paid to promote innovation. The need to spend defense costs can help in this regard. Pension reform, wisely done, can greatly improve the existence of risks. The reform and simplification of the tax system is also necessary. Finally, but no less important, the government should avoid any serious unpredictable mistakes. Its decisions to increase the price of the job through higher taxation, higher minimum wages and a much tighter settlement can prove huge mistakes.
The government should not allow itself to be buried in the endless breakdown of a fiscal position. Instead, it should focus on structural reforms in radical growth. They may not work fast. But they are the only thing that will work in the long run at all. Great reforms are vital.
English