The consensus is turning against austerity
The global organisations who supported Osborne are now warning against excessive austerity.
By George Eaton Published 20 January 2012 10:33
In making the case for his deficit reduction programme, George Osborne has often leaned heavily on arguments from authority. Here, from his speech to the 2010 Conservative conference, is a typical example:
On one side there is the IMF, the OECD, the credit rating agencies, the bond markets, the European Commission, the Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the British Chambers of Commerce, the Governor of the Bank of England, most of British business, two of our great historic political parties, one of the Miliband brothers, Tony Blair, and the British people.
On the other side is Ed Miliband and the trade union leaders who put him where he is.
But even in October 2010, when the austerity consensus was at its height, this was to understate the opposition. As Mehdi pointed out at the time, those on the other side also included Barack Obama, US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Nobel Prize-winning economists Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, FT columnists Martin Wolf and Samuel Brittan, Keynes's biographer Robert Skidelsky. One could add that 53 per cent of the "the British people" voted for parties opposed to the Conservatives' economic programme.
Still, Osborne could comfort himself with the thought that much of the political and economic establishment was on his side. What he forgot was that throughout history the economic consensus has often proved disastrously wrong. Now, after austerity has comprehensively failed in Britain and Europe, the intellectual tide is beginning to turn.
In a statement ahead of the World Economic Forum's annual meeting in Davos next week, the heads of the IMF, the OECD, the World Trade Organisation and the World Bank have all warned against too fast a pace of deficit reduction. They declare that fiscal consolidation should be used "to promote rather than reduce prospects for growth and employment" and should be applied "in a socially responsible manner."
Of course, none of these institutions is calling for deficit reduction to be abandoned. They're merely recognising the need for a more balanced approach of the kind that Labour has consistently argued for. Even the credit rating agenices now recognise the risks of too great a pace of austerity. Explaining its decision to downgrade the credit ratings of nine eurozone countries including France, Standard & Poor's - hitherto an advocate of extreme fiscal tightening - cited concerns over growth, not borrowing. "A reform process based on a pillar of fiscal austerity alone risks becoming self-defeating," it warned, "as domestic demand falls in line with consumers' rising concerns about job security."
That the consensus has begun to shift is unsurprising. In Europe, austerity has increased, rather than diminished, the threat of a Greek default and the collapse of the single currency. In Britain, Osborne's programme has entirely failed to deliver the growth and jobs that he promised. The Chancellor told the House of Commons in November 2010 that private sector job creation would "far outweigh" the job losses in the public sector. But the number of public sector jobs lost in the last year (276,000) now exceeds the number of private sector jobs created (262,000). In the last quarter, 67,000 public sector jobs were lost but just 5,000 private sector jobs were created. Moreover, if we reclassify RBS and Lloyds as private sector institutions, there were 3,000 job losses in the private sector.
Delivering his emergency Budget in June 2010, Osborne told the Commons: "Some have suggested that there is a choice between dealing with our debts and going for growth. That is a false choice. The crisis in the Eurozone shows that unless we deal with our debts there will be no growth."But rather than stimulating growth, Osborne's policies have strangled it. Over the last year, Britain has grown at a slower rate than ever EU country except Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, Slovenia and Denmark (see the final column on this Eurostat chart).
For all this, it is the Tories, not Labour, who enjoy a three-point lead in the latest YouGov poll. At the very moment that Ed Balls has been vindicated on the economy, it is his party that is losing the political battle. Labour is learning, to its horror, that you can combine austerity and popularity.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists

















11 comments
@george
Do you know when Osborne is going to start austerity measures in the UK?
The coalition have reduce public spending primarily by cutting the rate of recruitment into the state - the state is still a huge employer sucking in people.
Pitty Labour did not invest the £350Bn it borrowed before 2008 and the banking crisis. It was pumped into growing the public sector to treat the unions and voters but our kids now have to repay it. It would be enough for 3 oil industries (c. 750,000 permanent profit making jobs) in industries like renewable energy. Istead, just like now, Labour lurches from one bandwagon to the next scratching for votes.
@Indu
All those public sector workers being sacked is some kind of illusion?
Nowhere do any of these institutions say that deficit reduction isn't still important. What they say is that "austerity ALONE" is not enough.
Hence the call for more infrastructure spending (which is what the UK is doing) and more monetary easing (again what the Bank of England is doing).
Europe, which is where these attacks are aimed, has actually tightened monetary policy in the last year.
excessive austerity? we're still running deficits in the hundreds of billions.
bottom line is stick with infrastructure spend but cut growth sapping gov't admin jobs.
What austerity? Government spending continues to grow. Borrowing continues to grow. Debit continues to grow.
If this is austerity then the dictionary needs re-writing.
Eddy S, how exactly do government admin jobs sap growth? I assume you want taxes collected, driving licenses issued, pensions paid etc? The idea that government jiobs sap growth is complete bollocks.
There is no economic analysis here. This is just political spin. Nobody ever said that austerity alone was the solution. And Labour never had a "growth strategy", they had a strategy that was nearly identical to the coalition's, they simply marketed it differently. Ed Balls has been vindicated on nothing.
If the Spectator is going to talk about the economic consensus being wrong, they should spare a thought for 1981 when 364 economists all agreed the Tories were wrong to pursue austerity and wrong an open letter about it.
They were all wrong, austerity worked, and the economy began growing the moment the letter was published.
Reality is beginning to dawn on those idiots who believed 'expansionary austerity' and confidence fairies. They had no evidence to back their half witted claim that austerity creates growth - just some ideological nonsense that the 'market can solve all problems'. Utopian BS!
Keynes was right you Tory losers!
Laughable comment from Standard & Poors. It's taken them this long to figure that out? Seriously? How much longer are whole economies going to be buffeted at the behest of these tossers?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGveWJBuK-A
'The idea that government jiobs sap growth is complete bollocks.'
as evidenced by the the 10 billion computer project that's been scrapped
'At the very moment that Ed Balls has been vindicated on the economy,'just as he throws his hat in with the Tories
'How much longer are whole economies going to be buffeted at the behest of these tossers?'Yes, they should do what the bloody government tells them to do otherwise how does one establish independance?
'Keynes was right you Tory losers!'er???
and Finally the title
'The consensus is turning against austerity'as evidenced by some recent poll where the tories are in the lead.
One flew over the cuckoo's nest
Post new comment