Unlike the UK, France and Germany aren't in recession

Osborne was wrong to blame the eurozone for our double-dip recession.

George Osborne is fond of blaming the eurozone crisis  for Britain's economic woes (he recently claimed that the crisis had "killed off" growth in the UK) , so it's worth noting that, unlike the UK, the euro's two largest members - Germany and France - aren't in recession. While the British economy contracted by 0.7 per cent in the second quarter of this year, Eurostat figures out today showed that the French economy remained flat, while Germany grew by 0.3 per cent. In the previous quarter, Britain shrunk by 0.5 per cent, while Germany grew by 0.5 per cent and France stagnated.

Of course, since much of our trade is with the eurozone, its lack of growth (it collectively shrank by 0.2 per cent in Q2), doesn't help. But as even Tory MPs concede, it is some exaggeration to claim it "killed off" our recovery. The Chancellor accomplished that all by himself. It was his absurd claim that the UK was on "the brink of bankruptcy" and his premature austerity measures, most notably the 2.5 point rise in VAT, that destroyed confidence and strangled growth. With the exception of Italy, Britain is the only G20 country to have suffered a double-dip recession.

At this moment, contrary to Osborne, Britain should actually be profiting from the eurozone crisis. With investors ever more reluctant to lend to eurozone countries, the UK can afford to borrow at the lowest interest rates for 300 years. We are, as Osborne has said many times, a "safe haven". Yet the Chancellor appears determined not to take advantage of this fact. He has continually refused to borrow for growth (in the form of tax cuts and higher infrastructure spending), despite little evidence that this would lead to a rise in British gilt yields. It is only Osborne's political pride that is preventing a change of direction. Borrowing for growth would be a tacit admission that his nemesis, Ed Balls, was right and that he was wrong. Until the Chancellor backs down, we will all collectively pay for his stubbornness.

George Osborne claimed that the eurozone had "killed off" the UK's economic recovery. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Picture: ANDRÉ CARRILHO
Show Hide image

Leader: Boris Johnson, a liar and a charlatan

The Foreign Secretary demeans a great office of state with his carelessness and posturing. 

Boris Johnson is a liar, a charlatan and a narcissist. In 1988, when he was a reporter at the Times, he fabricated a quotation from his godfather, an eminent historian, which duly appeared in a news story on the front page. He was sacked. (We might pause here to acknowledge the advantage to a young journalist of having a godfather whose opinions were deemed worthy of appearing in a national newspaper.) Three decades later, his character has not improved.

On 17 September, Mr Johnson wrote a lengthy, hyperbolic article for the Daily Telegraph laying out his “vision” for Brexit – in terms calculated to provoke and undermine the Prime Minister (who was scheduled to give a speech on Brexit in Florence, Italy, as we went to press). Extracts of his “article”, which reads more like a speech, appeared while a terror suspect was on the loose and the country’s threat level was at “critical”, leading the Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, to remark: “On the day of a terror attack where Britons were maimed, just hours after the threat level is raised, our only thoughts should be on service.”

Three other facets of this story are noteworthy. First, the article was published alongside other pieces echoing and praising its conclusions, indicating that the Telegraph is now operating as a subsidiary of the Johnson for PM campaign. Second, Theresa May did not respond by immediately sacking her disloyal Foreign Secretary – a measure of how much the botched election campaign has weakened her authority. Finally, it is remarkable that Mr Johnson’s article repeated the most egregious – and most effective – lie of the EU referendum campaign. “Once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week,” the Foreign Secretary claimed. “It would be a fine thing, as many of us have pointed out, if a lot of that money went on the NHS.”

This was the promise of Brexit laid out by the official Vote Leave team: we send £350m to Brussels, and after leaving the EU, that money can be spent on public services. Yet the £350m figure includes the rebate secured by Margaret Thatcher – so just under a third of the sum never leaves the country. Also, any plausible deal will involve paying significant amounts to the EU budget in return for continued participation in science and security agreements. To continue to invoke this figure is shameless. That is not a partisan sentiment: the head of the UK Statistics Authority, Sir David Norgrove, denounced Mr Johnson’s “clear misuse of official statistics”.

In the days that followed, the chief strategist of Vote Leave, Dominic Cummings – who, as Simon Heffer writes in this week's New Statesman, is widely suspected of involvement in Mr Johnson’s article – added his voice. Brexit was a “shambles” so far, he claimed, because of the ineptitude of the civil service and the government’s decision to invoke Article 50 before outlining its own detailed demands.

There is a fine Yiddish word to describe this – chutzpah. Mr Johnson, like all the other senior members of Vote Leave in parliament, voted to trigger Article 50 in March. If he and his allies had concerns about this process, the time to speak up was then.

It has been clear for some time that Mr Johnson has no ideological attachment to Brexit. (During the referendum campaign, he wrote articles arguing both the Leave and Remain case, before deciding which one to publish – in the Telegraph, naturally.) However, every day brings fresh evidence that he and his allies are not interested in the tough, detailed negotiations required for such an epic undertaking. They will brush aside any concerns about our readiness for such a huge challenge by insisting that Brexit would be a success if only they were in charge of it.

This is unlikely. Constant reports emerge of how lightly Mr Johnson treats his current role. At a summit aiming to tackle the grotesque humanitarian crisis in Yemen, he is said to have astounded diplomats by joking: “With friends like these, who needs Yemenis?” The Foreign Secretary demeans a great office of state with his carelessness and posturing. By extension, he demeans our politics. 

This article first appeared in the 21 September 2017 issue of the New Statesman, The revenge of the left