Show Hide image

Hold on tight, it’s the double dip

A double-dip recession remains possible and with it far higher unemployment

The recession in the UK trundles along, much to the amazement of many. On 22 December, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) made it clear that GDP in the third quarter of 2009 fell by a revised 0.2 per cent, compared to the preliminary estimate of -0.4 per cent. That gives six quarters in a row of negative growth. Output has dropped by slightly over 6 per cent since its peak. Various publications from the Bank of England over the Christmas period were also quite downbeat.

First, the Bank reported that lending to British businesses fell for the ninth straight month in October as firms continued to pay down debt rather than take on new borrowing. It also reported that annual growth rates across all business sizes continued to weaken; total net consumer credit flows remained negative; and demand for loans by both businesses and consumers was expected to remain "subdued" during 2010.

Second, the Bank's regional agents reported that investment intentions remained weak, with many firms planning to hold or reduce spending still further during 2010. Indeed, few contacts anticipated any marked increase in demand over the next few months. They reported that many small- and medium-sized firms had been rejected for finance or that the terms of their existing borrowing had been tightened.

Overly bullish

Third, the minutes of the Monetary Policy Committee's December meeting made it clear that it was very much in "wait and see" mode. The MPC expressed concern over the lack of growth in money supply and at the relatively weak growth in exports, given sterling's depreciation and the bounce-back in world trade.

Some media reports said these minutes suggested that the MPC was done with quantitative easing. How they would know this is unclear, and it is certainly not my reading of the situation: the committee quite rightly made it clear that it will respond to events as the data arrives and that it has not ruled out anything. These minutes are considerably less optimistic and more balanced than the November inflation report, with its overly bullish, and essentially unbelievable, growth forecasts.

In another upbeat assessment, David Smith in the Sunday Times argued that "best of all is the job market" and claimed that the unemployment numbers suggest the economy has been recovering for some months. I am glad he is so confident. He went on to say: "One of the worst labour-market forecasters, interestingly, has been Danny Blanchflower, formerly of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee, who was appointed to the MPC for his labour-market expertise." Ooh, that hurt. Let me set the record straight.

Unemployment is lower than it would have been because of monetary and fiscal stimulus but will likely rise again in 2010 as the stimulus is removed. The Business Secretary, Peter Mandelson, announced university funding cuts of £398m for the coming financial year, with universities fined if they overreach their admissions quota. Youth unemployment will inevitably rise because of this ill-considered measure. It is probably a little early, therefore, to declare victory on the jobs front.

A further worry is that incomes are down. Non-labour incomes have fallen because of the low rates of interest on savings, and the latest release of the average weekly earnings index of pay in the private sector suggests that earnings growth has turned negative. Self-employment incomes, in all likelihood, have collapsed. So the pain has been shared more evenly than in previous recessions.

Unfortunately, earnings are not going to pick up any time soon. Chancellor Alistair Darling pledged to cap public-sector pay increases at 1 per cent. The latest monthly business survey by the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) showed that 63 per cent of businesses are planning wage freezes or pay cuts next year, while 18 per cent are considering the removal of benefits, such as bonuses and gym membership.

Newly published ONS data also suggests that UK households have hugely increased their savings in order to pay off debts. The average household saved almost £300 a month in the three months to September 2009, the largest amount for any quarter ever. But lower incomes together with higher savings implies lower spending, and fewer jobs in the future.

The Bank of England's regional agents also noted that firms had relatively few plans to increase permanent staffing levels significantly. Apparently, a number of companies are to let headcount drift down by not replacing staff who leave, which is bad news for the class of 2010, which graduates this summer. A major risk, the agents noted, is that employment may fall further if the rate of insolvencies picks up sharply. This is plausible given the deterioration in firms' balance sheets.

Spending in reverse

The December BCC survey found that two-thirds of firms plan to operate at the same or reduced capacity levels in the first quarter of 2010 - a strong indicator that business believes that demand and the trading environment will remain uncertain. This evidence is consistent with the results of the BCC's November survey, in which firms reported that a lack of customer demand would be the biggest obstacle over the next year.

In the inimitable words of Yogi Berra, it ain't over till it's over.

But why has the UK labour market outperformed the US, where unemployment has risen to over 10 per cent? Wages are not more flexible in the UK and the shock has been greater over here, because of the relatively large size of the financial sector and the greater rise in house prices. Spending has been helped in the UK by the high proportion of tracker mortgage-holders, who have benefited from low interest rates. But this will go into reverse when rates are increased. We entered recession after the US and will likely emerge later, and there is probably quite a lot more pain to come on the jobs front when the fiscal stimulus is removed. I hope I am wrong.

In his New Year message, the director general of the CBI, Richard Lambert, noted that many businesses are still worried about the possibility of a double-dip recession and what that would mean for jobs. So am I.

David Blanchflower is the Bruce V Rauner professor of economics at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, and the University of Stirling


Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter

David Blanchflower is economics editor of the New Statesman and professor of economics at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire

This article first appeared in the 11 January 2010 issue of the New Statesman, Obama: the year of living dangerously

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Labour tensions boil over at fractious MPs' meeting

Corbyn supporters and critics clash over fiscal charter U-turn and new group Momentum. 

"A total fucking shambles". That was the verdict of the usually emollient Ben Bradshaw as he left tonight's Parliamentary Labour Party meeting. His words were echoed by MPs from all wings of the party. "I've never seen anything like it," one shadow minister told me. In commitee room 14 of the House of Commons, tensions within the party - over the U-turn on George Osborne's fiscal charter and new Corbynite group Momentum - erupted. 

After a short speech by Jeremy Corbyn, shadow chancellor John McDonnell sought to explain his decision to oppose Osborne's fiscal charter (having supported it just two weeks ago). He cited the change in global economic conditions and the refusal to allow Labour to table an amendment. McDonnell also vowed to assist colleagues in Scotland in challenging the SNP anti-austerity claims. But MPs were left unimpressed. "I don't think I've ever heard a weaker round of applause at the PLP than the one John McDonnell just got," one told me. MPs believe that McDonnell's U-turn was due to his failure to realise that the fiscal charter mandated an absolute budget surplus (leaving no room to borrow to invest), rather than merely a current budget surplus. "A huge joke" was how a furious John Mann described it. He and others were outraged by the lack of consultation over the move. "At 1:45pm he [McDonnell] said he was considering our position and would consult with the PLP and the shadow cabinet," one MP told me. "Then he announces it before 6pm PLP and tomorow's shadow cabinet." 

When former shadow cabinet minister Mary Creagh asked Corbyn about the new group Momentum, which some fear could be used as a vehicle to deselect critical MPs (receiving what was described as a weak response), Richard Burgon, one of the body's directors, offered a lengthy defence and was, one MP said, "just humiliated". He added: "It looked at one point like they weren't even going to let him finish. As the fractious exchanges were overheard by journalists outside, Emily Thornberry appealed to colleagues to stop texting hacks and keep their voices down (within earshot of all). 

After a calmer conference than most expected, tonight's meeting was evidence of how great the tensions within Labour remain. Veteran MPs described it as the worst PLP gathering for 30 years. The fear for all MPs is that they have the potential to get even worse. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.