Show Hide image

IMF calls for Plan B

More infrastructure spending and tax cuts, and less focus on reducing the deficit.

The IMF has explicitly called for the UK to abandon austerity, arguing that the Government should boost infrastructure spending, possibly by borrowing at historically-low interest rates, and that the Bank of England should cut its rates and perform another round of quantitative easing.

The primary recommendations are focused on the Bank. "Further monetary easing is required", as well as "further quantitative easing" and possibly "cutting the policy rate below its current level of 0.5 percent".

The IMF supports the idea of credit easing (performing a program analogous to quantitative easing but focusing on SMEs rather than banks), and writes that the Government should consider "purchasing private-sector bonds to support mortgage lending and financing for business".

The monetary advice is well timed to influence a Bank which has just agreed to examine its own failures when it came to dealing with the crisis, but the real political bombshells come in the advice for future fiscal policy.

Arguing for greater infrastructure spending, the Fund writes:

Fiscal space for further growth-enhancing measures could be generated by property tax reform, restraint of public employee compensation growth, and better targeting of transfers to those in need. This fiscal space could be used to fund higher infrastructure spending, which has a high multiplier and raises potential output. It will also be important to shield the poorest from the impact of consolidation.

Translation: austerity for civil servants, more means-testing and reformed council taxes/stamp duty should result in extra money for the government, which should be used not to reduce the deficit but to build infrastructure, which is far better value for money. The IMF adds that:

If growth does not build momentum and is significantly below forecasts even after substantial additional monetary stimulus and further credit easing measures, planned fiscal adjustment would need to be reconsidered. Under these circumstances, gains from delaying fiscal consolidation could be larger as multipliers are estimated to move inversely with growth and the effectiveness of monetary policy.

Translation: If we have low growth even after its prior recommendations are taken into account, the Government's budgetary priority should be growth, not austerity. By focusing on infrastructure spending and temporary tax cuts, the Government can retain credibility that it will pay down the deficit in the future while boosting growth in the short term.

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Is anyone prepared to solve the NHS funding crisis?

As long as the political taboo on raising taxes endures, the service will be in financial peril. 

It has long been clear that the NHS is in financial ill-health. But today's figures, conveniently delayed until after the Conservative conference, are still stunningly bad. The service ran a deficit of £930m between April and June (greater than the £820m recorded for the whole of the 2014/15 financial year) and is on course for a shortfall of at least £2bn this year - its worst position for a generation. 

Though often described as having been shielded from austerity, owing to its ring-fenced budget, the NHS is enduring the toughest spending settlement in its history. Since 1950, health spending has grown at an average annual rate of 4 per cent, but over the last parliament it rose by just 0.5 per cent. An ageing population, rising treatment costs and the social care crisis all mean that the NHS has to run merely to stand still. The Tories have pledged to provide £10bn more for the service but this still leaves £20bn of efficiency savings required. 

Speculation is now turning to whether George Osborne will provide an emergency injection of funds in the Autumn Statement on 25 November. But the long-term question is whether anyone is prepared to offer a sustainable solution to the crisis. Health experts argue that only a rise in general taxation (income tax, VAT, national insurance), patient charges or a hypothecated "health tax" will secure the future of a universal, high-quality service. But the political taboo against increasing taxes on all but the richest means no politician has ventured into this territory. Shadow health secretary Heidi Alexander has today called for the government to "find money urgently to get through the coming winter months". But the bigger question is whether, under Jeremy Corbyn, Labour is prepared to go beyond sticking-plaster solutions. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.