Will Osborne produce a credible plan for growth?

Amid the gloom, one good news story isn’t enough and the Chancellor knows it. He must act to stem th

Tuesday's ONS release provided a rare slice of good news for George Osborne. Public sector net borrowing, excluding aid to the banking sector, totalled £6.5bn last month compared to £7.7bn in October 2010, leading analysts to predict that the Chancellor will meet his target this year for net borrowing. Now is not the time to clink the champagne flutes, however.

The timing of this news is important. It follows David Cameron's disclosure on Monday that getting the finances in order is "proving harder than anyone envisaged" and comes ahead of revised forecasts from the OBR next week, which are expected to confirm what others have been saying for months: the Chancellor's plans to eliminate the current structural deficit by 2014/15 are going to have to wait an extra year, probably even two.

Whether Tuesday's data will cushion the impact of the impending blow to be delivered by the OBR remains to be seen. The Chancellor will no doubt use it to reiterate the claim that his plan is broadly on track and the country must stay the course to keep the markets at bay. But deep down, he knows he faces an even bigger problem: an economy starved of growth. As he will no doubt be reminded going into next Tuesday's Autumn Statement, GDP increased by just 0.5 per cent over the year to the third quarter of this year and it remains 4 per cent below its peak level of Q1 2008. Following in the tracks of the Bank of England, the OBR is expected to downgrade its growth forecasts for 2011 and 2012 for a fourth time.

There is no shortage of reasons that have been given to explain the current slowdown. The government would like everyone to think that it is the fault of the Eurozone crisis, despite the fact that our GDP slide started far earlier than the rumblings in Athens and Rome. But the cause of the slowdown is less important than the fact of it. If there is a role for policymakers to play in responding to fluctuations in growth then action is needed now.

Thankfully, Cameron, Clegg, Cable and Osborne have started to acknowledge this, which is why we are likely to see announcements in next week's Autumn Statement to bring forward planned capital spending and further details on how "credit easing" will be implemented. These steps are welcome, yet on their own insufficient. The package would be made worse if -- as is expected -- it includes a series of measures to curb employment rights in the view, mistakenly held by those on the right, that this will magically spur job creation in the private sector.

On Tuesday, IPPR published our top 10 ideas for how the Chancellor can revive the stagnant economy and promote sustainable and inclusive growth. Some of our proposals are concerned with the lack of demand in the economy right now, while others focus on what needs to be done to address the long-term structural weaknesses that have plagued our economic performance.

In the short-term, the priority is plain and simple: generate more growth to reverse the recent rise in unemployment and set the economy back on the path to full employment. Hence our call for the Chancellor to pledge an additional £5 billion for infrastructure spending in affordable housing and transport in 2011/12, reverse plans to cut capital allowances which will disproportionately affect manufacturers, and offer a job guarantee to every long-term unemployed young person by injecting an extra £2 billion into a ramped-up 'Green Deal'. In our view Osborne must also ensure that further fiscal tightening not only heeds to market concerns, but is also response to business and consumer confidence, and the outlook for growth.

In the medium-term, there is a need to ensure that any growth is sustainable -- taking advantage of our strengths, whilst not being dependent on a handful of bubble-prone sectors -- and that the benefits are shared broadly. To help achieve this, we propose the creation of fully-operational National Investment Bank by 2013, a revamped Export Credit Guarantee scheme to support SMEs and giving the service sector better access burgeoning overseas markets, and a rethink of immigration rules that restrict students and skilled migrants entering from outside the EU, which hampers businesses and our world-class higher education sector.

Faced with the prospect of a decade of stagnant growth, the government must now act. It must first put out the fire and then rebuild the house. This will not be a straightforward task, but it must happen. No amount of good news should distract the Chancellor from the urgent need to announce a credible and comprehensive plan for growth -- of the sort we prescribe -- this coming Tuesday.

David Nash is Research Fellow at IPPR

Getty
Show Hide image

Our union backed Brexit, but that doesn't mean scrapping freedom of movement

We can only improve the lives of our members, like those planning stike action at McDonalds, through solidarity.

The campaign to defend and extend free movement – highlighted by the launch of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement this month – is being seen in some circles as a back door strategy to re-run the EU referendum. If that was truly the case, then I don't think Unions like mine (the BFAWU) would be involved, especially as we campaigned to leave the EU ourselves.

In stark contrast to the rhetoric used by many sections of the Leave campaign, our argument wasn’t driven by fear and paranoia about migrant workers. A good number of the BFAWU’s membership is made up of workers not just from the EU, but from all corners of the world. They make a positive contribution to the industry that we represent. These people make a far larger and important contribution to our society and our communities than the wealthy Brexiteers, who sought to do nothing other than de-humanise them, cheered along by a rabid, right-wing press. 

Those who are calling for end to freedom of movement fail to realise that it’s people, rather than land and borders that makes the world we live in. Division works only in the interest of those that want to hold power, control, influence and wealth. Unfortunately, despite a rich history in terms of where division leads us, a good chunk of the UK population still falls for it. We believe that those who live and work here or in other countries should have their skills recognised and enjoy the same rights as those born in that country, including the democratic right to vote. 

Workers born outside of the UK contribute more than £328 million to the UK economy every day. Our NHS depends on their labour in order to keep it running; the leisure and hospitality industries depend on them in order to function; the food industry (including farming to a degree) is often propped up by their work.

The real architects of our misery and hardship reside in Westminster. It is they who introduced legislation designed to allow bosses to act with impunity and pay poverty wages. The only way we can really improve our lives is not as some would have you believe, by blaming other poor workers from other countries, it is through standing together in solidarity. By organising and combining that we become stronger as our fabulous members are showing through their decision to ballot for strike action in McDonalds.

Our members in McDonalds are both born in the UK and outside the UK, and where the bosses have separated groups of workers by pitting certain nationalities against each other, the workers organised have stood together and fought to win change for all, even organising themed social events to welcome each other in the face of the bosses ‘attempts to create divisions in the workplace.

Our union has held the long term view that we should have a planned economy with an ability to own and control the means of production. Our members saw the EU as a gravy train, working in the interests of wealthy elites and industrial scale tax avoidance. They felt that leaving the EU would give the UK the best opportunity to renationalise our key industries and begin a programme of manufacturing on a scale that would allow us to be self-sufficient and independent while enjoying solid trading relationships with other countries. Obviously, a key component in terms of facilitating this is continued freedom of movement.

Many of our members come from communities that voted to leave the EU. They are a reflection of real life that the movers and shakers in both the Leave and Remain campaigns took for granted. We weren’t surprised by the outcome of the EU referendum; after decades of politicians heaping blame on the EU for everything from the shape of fruit to personal hardship, what else could we possibly expect? However, we cannot allow migrant labour to remain as a political football to give succour to the prejudices of the uninformed. Given the same rights and freedoms as UK citizens, foreign workers have the ability to ensure that the UK actually makes a success of Brexit, one that benefits the many, rather than the few.

Ian Hodon is President of the Bakers and Allied Food Workers Union and founding signatory of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement.