Yet another marker that a double-dip looms

Services, the biggest and most important sector, is slowing.

The last of the three CIPS/Markit Purchasing Manager's Index (PMI) indices that are published every month hit the streets this morning. Each month, we get data for construction, manufacturing and services from these surveys, which are much more timely than the official data -- and they have the advantage that they don't get revised. They also have pretty good predictive power. I have already reported here on the horrid data for construction and manufacturing, so the services sector report was going to be vitally important. Not least because services are the biggest and most important sector. Needless to say, the news was appalling.

The services business activity index fell over 4 points to just above 51; its sharpest fall for a decade and the lowest level since the end of last year. The worry is that it is heading much lower into territory suggesting outright contraction. The decline in the index was greater than those seen in the autumn of 2008 (following the collapse of Lehman Brothers) and was surpassed only by the foot-and-mouth related fall of April 2001. With underlying trends in activity and new business weakening, and confidence regarding the future down, a further drop in service sector employment was recorded in August. Respondents noted the non-replacement of leavers or forced redundancies, as they engaged in restructuring or had insufficient work relative to capacity. Unemployment looks likely to rise further.

The combination of data from the three PMIs plotted in the chart makes the prospect that there will be little or no growth during the rest of the year highly likely. The declines in the three PMIs in 2007 predicted what was to come well before the official data, which didn't start to show sharp falls until well into 2008, so the concern is that these drops suggest there are bad things to come. Indeed, the prospects of a double-dip are rising fast.

Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit, also has concerns that look right.

The PMI surveys collectively pointed to a near-stagnation of economic growth in August, signaling an increased risk that GDP growth in the third quarter could be even weaker than the 0.2 per cent rise seen in the three months to June. Forward-looking indicators also suggest that the economy could weaken further at the end of the quarter, raising the prospect of a slide back into contraction in Q4 -- if not in Q3 -- and will provide ammunition for those seeking a further injection of stimulus into the economy by the Bank of England. The all-sector PMI is at a level which has always triggered interest rate cuts in the past.

This data makes the MPC decision this week a close call: they will leave interest rates untouched as they have every month since March 2009. As a consequence of the recent round of poor data, though -- including stagnation on the jobs front in the United States and an evolving crisis in the eurozone -- the chances the MPC will move to doing more asset purchases (ie QE, at their meeting this week) has risen. These are the sort of circumstances under which a central bank pulls a surprise in order to show the markets that, in contrast to the Chancellor, they are up to the task.

If they don't act at this meeting, it is all but certain they will do so at their October meeting. Adam Posen looks to have been spot on.

David Blanchflower is economics editor of the New Statesman and professor of economics at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire

Getty
Show Hide image

The 5 things the Tories aren't telling you about their manifesto

Turns out the NHS is something you really have to pay for after all. 

When Theresa May launched the Conservative 2017 manifesto, she borrowed the most popular policies from across the political spectrum. Some anti-immigrant rhetoric? Some strong action on rip-off energy firms? The message is clear - you can have it all if you vote Tory.

But can you? The respected thinktank the Institute for Fiscal Studies has now been through the manifesto with a fine tooth comb, and it turns out there are some things the Tory manifesto just doesn't mention...

1. How budgeting works

They say: "a balanced budget by the middle of the next decade"

What they don't say: The Conservatives don't talk very much about new taxes or spending commitments in the manifesto. But the IFS argues that balancing the budget "would likely require more spending cuts or tax rises even beyond the end of the next parliament."

2. How this isn't the end of austerity

They say: "We will always be guided by what matters to the ordinary, working families of this nation."

What they don't say: The manifesto does not backtrack on existing planned cuts to working-age welfare benefits. According to the IFS, these cuts will "reduce the incomes of the lowest income working age households significantly – and by more than the cuts seen since 2010".

3. Why some policies don't make a difference

They say: "The Triple Lock has worked: it is now time to set pensions on an even course."

What they don't say: The argument behind scrapping the "triple lock" on pensions is that it provides an unneccessarily generous subsidy to pensioners (including superbly wealthy ones) at the expense of the taxpayer.

However, the IFS found that the Conservatives' proposed solution - a "double lock" which rises with earnings or inflation - will cost the taxpayer just as much over the coming Parliament. After all, Brexit has caused a drop in the value of sterling, which is now causing price inflation...

4. That healthcare can't be done cheap

They say: "The next Conservative government will give the NHS the resources it needs."

What they don't say: The £8bn more promised for the NHS over the next five years is a continuation of underinvestment in the NHS. The IFS says: "Conservative plans for NHS spending look very tight indeed and may well be undeliverable."

5. Cutting immigration costs us

They say: "We will therefore establish an immigration policy that allows us to reduce and control the number of people who come to Britain from the European Union, while still allowing us to attract the skilled workers our economy needs." 

What they don't say: The Office for Budget Responsibility has already calculated that lower immigration as a result of the Brexit vote could reduce tax revenues by £6bn a year in four years' time. The IFS calculates that getting net immigration down to the tens of thousands, as the Tories pledge, could double that loss.

Julia Rampen is the digital news editor of the New Statesman (previously editor of The Staggers, The New Statesman's online rolling politics blog). She has also been deputy editor at Mirror Money Online and has worked as a financial journalist for several trade magazines. 

0800 7318496