Voices

Views from elsewhere

Syndicate contentRSS

Today's GDP figures are the final nail in the coffin of Osborne's credibility

This was all so avoidable, and entirely predictable.

George Osborne
"Slasher" Osborne has been proved wrong yet again. Photograph: Getty Images

The Q2 GDP growth figures from the ONS today were absolutely awful. Indeed, it was even worse than I had expected, having predicted -0.5 per cent against a consensus view of -0.2 per cent. The number came in at -0.7 per cent, which meant that the economy has had three successive quarters of negative growth - four of the last five and five of the last seven.

The economy has contracted by 1.4 per cent over the last three quarters and by 0.8 per cent since the Chancellor's autumn statement in 2010. The UK and Italy are the only two major countries in double dip recession and growth has been worse in the UK over the last year than it has been in Spain. The decline was broad-based, driven especially by a collapse in construction, which declined by 5.2 per cent in Q2, following 4.9 per cent on the previous quarter. Production fell by 1.3 per cent and services by 0.1 per cent. The IMF forecast of 0.2 per cent growth last week already looks overly optimistic - I have pencilled in -0.5 per cent or worse.

The coalition government took over an economy that was growing and by its inept policies it has killed growth stone dead. In interviews today, the Chancellor claimed he was “relentlessly focused” on sorting the economy out in the same way (presumably as King Canute was also determined to keep the tide back?). This, as ever, was worthless drivel because it is clear to all that the government's economic policy of austerity has failed and they have no clue what to do. The only fix is a fundamental U-turn with tax cuts, especially VAT, and big incentives for firms to invest and hire today – not in three years time. And what about youth unemployment? Policies to get infrastructure going are welcome but they won't have any effect for years; they should have been implemented when the government took office - now it is too late to get the economy growing again anytime soon. The Tory-led government still has no growth plan. If it does, let’s hear it.

The recession deniers were out in force saying that they couldn’t possibly be wrong, so there must be something wrong with the numbers. Of course, the main reason for this is that they supported the government's austerity nonsense and have egg on their faces. Just to make the point for the umpteenth time – the average data revision over the last 20 years is +0.1 per cent and over the last five years -0.1 per cent. In fact, the data revisions have generally been on the low side when the economy is slowing, as occurred in 2008. The statistical chances of the data being revised down further are the same as being revised up.

I do recall the 35 business leaders, who wrote to the Telegraph in October 2010 to say:

It has been suggested that the deficit reduction programme set out by George Osborne in his emergency Budget should be watered down and spread over more than one parliament. We believe that this would be a mistake. Addressing the debt problem in a decisive way will improve business and consumer confidence....There is no reason to think that the pace of consolidation envisaged in the Budget will undermine the recovery.

It hasn't exactly worked out that way. There has been no recovery, the economy is smaller today than it was when they put pen to paper, and business and consumer confidence has collapsed. It would be interesting to hear from them today on why it all went so badly wrong. Their silence is telling.

I now have every expectation that within a few days the UK will lose its AAA credit rating. I never thought it was actually a big deal as proved by the fact that when France was downgraded and bond yields fell. But Slasher Osborne set it up as something he should be judged against and so we should all do that.

This was all so avoidable, and entirely predictable. Our incompetent, part-time Chancellor and his advisers should be removed from office and put out to pasture. Ed Balls was right.

I am very angry that this visitation of evil spirits had to be foisted on the British people. We deserve better. This really is time for the biggest U-turn in history - that's what failure brings. I really have no sympathy for the fools – Cameron, Osborne and Clegg especially – who talked the economy down by claiming it was bankrupt and falsely comparing the UK to Greece.

No more excuses.

 

40 comments

hugh markey's picture

Georgie Porgie can afford to continues playing the spoilt brat if the rating agencies heap praise on the little twerp. Just too much pocket money.

Little Emperor

Indu Pendent's picture

Oh David.

"This was all so avoidable, and entirely predictable". .... Are they your prophetic words to pen for Obama in 2013 Q1 when their vast borrowing and simplistic stimulus runs out? We are already seeing it start -- they have waisted their money and their chances. The era of borrow and spend policies is over.

Please dont re-write UK history. The last government borrowed massively -- its not the magic State Fairy why the economy boomed but the sacrafice of the life chances of our kids who are left with the £600Bn debt. They ran down UK industry and grew the state in its place leaving a huge structural deficit. Thats true itsnt it.

All Labour has to offer is winding the clock back to Gordon via toxic Ed Balls. Miliband should reshuffle him out of the shadow chancellor position.

Siôn Eurfyl Jones's picture

I don't think the Tories care about the economy - their friend's assets are safely squirrelled away in tax havens, what they want is an excuse to destroy every pillar of social provision, every worker's right, - every scrap of decency and pretence to civilisation that has been won since the first war, and they don't care if they have to destroy the economy to do it. The NHS in England is probably already beyond saving. Welfare benefits are next. Education in England is being sold off to religious crackpots. What will be left of state provision after they have finished? - NOTHING - if they have their dogmatic way. Ironic that they are not even elected by a majority - even in England. Thank God for devolution in the Celtic Nations!

Leon Wolfeson's picture

We haven't deserved AAA for some years now.

Of course for the 1% where everything's fine, their masterplan to demolish the social infrastructure allows now alternative. The Tories know EXACTLY what they're doing, ib their crusade against growth.

(You need to deliberately suppress a recovery from recession. The Tories...have)

Colin Sloss  's picture

Apparently David has got it wrong, but he seems right here. I doubt Indu will post on this thread.

Indu Pendent's picture

Hello Mr ISTJ
Got that wrong then :)

May be re-read Danny's article and you'll see its full of partisan bias supported by 'I told you so' and 'he didnt want to do that' . It needs recalibrating in order to make sense of it of the economics.

Danny only ever uses a pencil for his projections (he's still learning to use an inky pen).

Junior's picture

"No more excuses"
http://kit-electronics.org.ua/

andyGCC's picture

I posted a comment a year or two ago, stating that no one could save the UK economy; not even Harry Houdini. Alas the UK is still too burdened by debt, high tax and onerous regulation. The Bank of England faked the so called recovery by printing money. In economics speak, it was all nominal; not real.

Maybe Osbourne could have done better at budget time, been more strategic about the UK's long term vision too. However, to say that a monkey could have done a better job, as you just exclaimed on the radio, is nonesense. The UK has a huge debt overhang and will need more time to sober up. Indeed this may involve more debt restructurings/defaults, before GDP advances in a sustainable way.

p.s. Shhhhh.....I won't tell anyone about your lamentable record at the Bank of England with all those other court jesters.

VicSingh's picture

You get my vote for being the most desperate (in trying to defend the inexcusable i.e. that useless excuse of a chancellor Osborne) and the stupid (in besically trying to say it's all Labours fault ...yaaawn), comment on this page.

Well done!! Gold medal in the post to be delivered and guarded by G4S!!

mike555's picture

So what are your thoughts on the tripling of house prices under New Labour Vic , what effect did this have on the poor and low paid? What about the explosion in consumer debt? I can't get anyone to give an answer on this. Many people were warning back in the early 2000's about it, what were those in power doing about it all? Surprise me and give an answer. I doubt I'll get one.

I don't believe if New Labour were still in power everything would be alright, you can't keep spending and borrowing beyond your means.

Don't think this is a defense of the Tories, I don't think things would have been any different under them. They've taken up where Labour left off when it comes to trying to prop house prices up with low rates and shared ownership schemes.

It looks like we'll see even more QE despite around 25% of GDP already being printed, where's that gone then? And unbelievably maybe another cut in rates, more reasons for consumers to behave recklessly knowing full well the system will bail them out. What a dreadful lesson for the next generation.

matthew fox's picture

So your playing " defense " are we Bozo555, how very American you inbred.

But it is looks like our resident cretin really needs to understand mathematics.

QE stood at £375,000,000,000 pounds in July 2012, UK GDP for July 2012 stood at £355,828,000,000

Please explain cretin, how you arrived at 25% or have you now changed the meaning of a quarter.

"You can't keep spending and borrowing beyond your means "

Oh look, more tripe from Bozo555, I take he is ignoring the latest PSNCR figures for Jun 12, Income and Corporation Tax receipts both down.

Yet again, your latest entry for wally brain of the year shines through, the dishonest narrative of how spending solely causes borrowing.

It looks like Bozo555 is hankering for the days of Thatcherism, 3 million unemployed, a tripling of low income families, and people working full time on £2.5o an hour.

mike555's picture

Oh look more juvenile insults, tell us what GDP was for the whole of last year Fox.

matthew fox's picture

Don't start moving the goalposts cretin, the numbers speak for themselves, if your not prepared to retract your lies, so be it, but then again you being a coward doesn't help.

mike555's picture

Are you for real Fox? How have I moved the goalposts? I said we've printed around 25% of GDP already, why won't you tell us what GDP of the UK is for 2011?

I'll give you a clue it was much more than the amount of QE so far.

matthew fox's picture

I am real my simple-minded friend. A clue from you idiot, your totally clueless.

When did you first mention 2011? Last time I checked we are in 2012, and for the record, we had QE in 2012.

So you need to start all over again clown.

mike555's picture

Dismal as ever, 2011 is the last complete year of GDP figures.

We've not just had QE this year or have you been asleep?

Post up the GDP figure for 2011 then explain how 375bn isn't around a quarter of GDP? I can answer your feeble ridicule all day long.

matthew fox's picture

Dismal not really, we are in 2012, or didn't someone make you aware. Also we have had QE 2012, so if I was you, I would pipe down.

Again your being dishonest and fail to answer my question, when did you mention 2011 in your original post, come on, you can't be serious and now telling me you mentioned 2011.

Look what you have written.

" It looks like we'll see even more QE despite around 25% of GDP already being printed"

mike555's picture

Fox, what are you on about? I've told you why I used 2011, it's the last complete year of GDP figures, which bit of that are you struggling with? How can I calculate a percentage of 2012 GDP when 2012 hasn't even finished?What I have written makes perfect sense, I'll make this easier for you and prove myself correct yet again:

UK GDP figures in £m 2011:

Q1: 358,977
Q2: 358,657
Q3: 360,786
Q4: 359,489

Total for 2011 = £1,437,909

QE of £375bn is 26% of GDP, which as I said is around a quarter (I can tell you how to work out the percentage if you're still confused). We can all see what merit there is to your ridicule.

Use the 2012 figures so far as well if you like, doesn't make much difference. Lets see if you can explain your own posts like I do, you can start with this:

"if your not prepared to retract your lies, so be it, but then again you being a coward doesn't help."

So what are you saying I've lied about this time?

matthew fox's picture

Bozo555, please stop ignoring what you have written, again you didn't mention 2011, in your original post, come on be honest for a change and admit it.

mike555's picture

Pathetic. If someones uses GDP to illustrate an amount of money I think it's safe to assume you're using the current figures rather than say GDP from 1952, I'll try to remember not everyone has common sense next time I make such a post.

So what am I supposed to have lied about? Explain your posts. I notice another dismal lack of answers.

matthew fox's picture

I know you assume clown, that is your biggest weakness, too much guessing.

But as usual all i get is ranting out of you, you didn't mention 2011, I have heard this pathetic excuse about it being a full year, even though we are in month seven of 2012.

Lack of answers, the word ironic springs to mind, why did the ECB increase rates in Jul 2011?, why did the Labour Government merge the two CGT rates ( that is well over 18 months old ) so many questions no answers to speak of.

But lets talk about QE cretin, let me fill in the gaps as usual.

The QE programme started in March 2009. The initial was £75 billion, with an authority for a total of £150 Billion. By the end on 2009, the programme had a total value of £200 Billion

Now with you being stupid, are you telling me it is fair to compare an action started in early 2009, against the economic output of 2011, in effect 2 years after the event? Just remind me how that works again?

Moving on, the next bout of QE came in Oct 11, with an extra £75 Billion, bringing a total of £275 billion.

In 2012, we had two bouts of QE, £50 Billion in Feb 12 and Jul 12, bring the programme to £375 billion.

In effect, you have shifted £300 Billion of QE from 2009 and 2012 into 2011.

mike555's picture

Dismal. Explain how QE so far isn't around 25% of the last full year of GDP, you can't. You ask me to retract my lies but can't even say what I've lied about, I've proved I'm correct yet again.

It is fair to compare QE with GDP as it gives an idea how much has been printed, what is wrong with that? Explain. You'd argue whatever I said. I've answered your questions, you've avoided mine, go and look. If you think your pathetic posts will stop me posting you will be very disappointed.

matthew fox's picture

Dismal, not really, I leave that to you. Again, let me solicit the facts. We had £200 billion of QE in 2009, if your going to dispute that, make my day.

You are comparing the economy in 2011, to an event that happened in 2009.

mike555's picture

Is that the best you can do? What are you on about? Where have I disputed what was printed in 2009?

Explain what is wrong with illustrating total QE as a proportion of GDP? It's a very simple concept to grasp. You cannot change the fact that house prices tripled under New Labour which had a devastating effect on the poor, but was a real boon for multi property owning landlords.

matthew fox's picture

Don't start moving the goalposts cretin, the numbers speak for themselves, if your not prepared to retract your lies, so be it, but then again you being a coward doesn't help.

matthew fox's picture

Don't start moving the goalposts cretin, the numbers speak for themselves, if your not prepared to retract your lies, so be it, but then again you being a coward doesn't help.

Rev Graeme Hancocks's picture

David Blanchflower has been proven right time after time. He is right - this inept and useless chancellor should be judged by the standards he as set himself.

David Lilley's picture

This is so incorrect and I mean that from an "objectve knowledge" assessment and not an "opinion". David's "opinion" is also starkly political and could have been written by Ed Balls.

1. Yes Labour achieved marginally positive GDP growth that has now been lost. But any fool can create GDP growth by bringing forward tomorrow's income and spending it today. Its called taking a sub. But take a week's sub and live on nothing next week. That's why I used the term "fool".

2. Labour provided a mirage turnaround by increasing pensions by 5.5%, benefits by 6%, NMW by 6% and UBR by 7% when inflation was only 2% and an election was comming. Great news for the grey vote and the traditional Labour vote but terrible news for those that work.

Andrew Crook's picture

Mr Lilley,

You dont know what you are talking about. I advise you to find and read the article by Jonathon Portes from 25/7, under UK politics, which describes how the Conservative government during the 93/94 recession increased spending to overhaul a budget deficit equal to that in 2011. Conservative elite toffs should really stop playing the game of 'who can be the most conservative' because, like now, they are becoming fascists. For example, social spending costs have got nothing to do with supply-side economics and your reference to 'benefits', NMW and UBR simply show your bigotry.

Agent's picture

Why doesn't Osbourne just resign. In doing so he would remove the single biggest barrier to economic success at a stroke.

matthew fox's picture

I see all the Prof Blanchflower haters are keeping a low profile.

What has happened to the march of the makers, and deficit denial.

Jon Danzig's picture

I asked government member, Jo Johnson, MP, brother of London Mayor Boris Johnson, if Britain could be a number one economy again. He said no. In fact, as a country he said we are just going to get poorer and poorer relative to other countries. To see the YouTube video of my question and his reply go to:

http://youtu.be/IpvOOqMd6Ww (55 seconds)

Jon Danzig's picture

I asked government member, Jo Johnson, MP, brother of London Mayor Boris Johnson, if Britain could be a number one economy again. He said no. In fact, as a country he said we are just going to get poorer and poorer relative to other countries. To see the YouTube video of my question and his reply go to:

http://youtu.be/IpvOOqMd6Ww (55 seconds)

Francesca Corson's picture

All that Blanchflower has argued since the election of the coalition has happened. He appeared to be in a small minority of economists who from the outset argued that Osborne's strategy would lead to a lack of growth - and sadly for Britain, his predictions have proved remarkably accurate. I suspect that the whole Osborne strategy was not really about economics; rather it was an attempt to use the financial crisis as an excuse to create a smaller state. It is argued by some that most of the government cuts have not hit us yet - a scary thought for Britain and for many ordinary people. The sad thing is that I cannot see Osborne and the coalition doing much to change the current situation through a change of policy.

Davidaslindsay's picture

We have been told by every government for 30 years that we can have full employment or low inflation, but not both. So how come, and not exactly for the first time during that period, we now have desperately high unemployment and desperately high inflation simultaneously? I am reminded of the not unrelated argument, occasionally still trotted out, that minimum wage provision would destroy jobs, making low wages the condition of low unemployment. It always rang more than a little hollow here in the North East, with both the lowest wages and the highest unemployment in the country. Here in County Durham, we had both the lowest wages and the highest unemployment of the lot. I know. Imagine that.

With even the meaningless jibe that Ed Miliband was not as popular as his party now blown out of the water, the time is ripe to insist on the successful combination of full employment with low inflation. A strong financial services sector with a
strong food production and manufacturing base, and with the strong democratic accountability of both. A leading role on the world stage with a vital commitment to peace, including a complete absence of weapons of mass destruction. Academic excellence with technical proficiency. Superb and inexpensive public transport with personal freedom and with close-knit rural communities. Visible and effective policing with civil liberty. And very high levels of productivity with the robust protection of workers, consumers, communities and the environment, including powerful workers’ representation at every level of corporate governance.

In a number of other Commonwealth and European countries, these combinations are taken for granted. Or they were until recently, in much happier times.

PatM's picture

Our part-time chancellor does seem to have a bit of a reverse midas touch, doesn't he? First he masterminds an election campaign which fails to win against one of the most unpopular governments since the war, and then he sinks the economy, and according to the IMF will add £500bn to the national debt by 2015. That's almost as much as Labour added in 13 years...and Labour invested in the economy, not in economic failure.

I wonder what odds I can get on Osborne being moved in the reshuffle?

The Corinthian's picture

"[T]he Chancellor claimed he was “relentlessly focused” on sorting the economy out in the same way (presumably as King Canute was also determined to keep the tide back?)"

This is deeply unfair. It's now generally acknowledged that Canute was consciously demonstrating the limits of monarchical power to his overzealous courtiers. To compare him to the clueless Osborne is gross slander!

postageincluded's picture

True enough, though weirdly, Knutsford (i.e. Canute's ford) is in Osborne's constituency. And he is a bit of a Cnut too.

Agent's picture

'Cnut'? surely you mean a

Mary Nash's picture

Bravo to Prof D Blanchflower for scolding G Osborne , and warning him that we may lose our AAA credit rating within a few days if he is stubbornly pursuing a failed economic policy. We are beginning to wonder if incompetent Osborne is familiar with basic economics. God help our over a million young unemployed who will be trapped in a generation of hopelessness and despair if Osborne sticks to his mantra"there is no alternative". When we lose our AAA credit rating , he might be jolted into action.

Latest tweets