2 important things that Ed Balls said today, but the media have largely missed

June 3, 2013 2:16 pm

I’ve just got back from Ed Ball’s speech on the economy this morning at Thompson Reuters and haven’t yet had the time to fully digest all of the arguments. So what follows is more of an “initial take” on the macroeconomic aspects of the speech than a “considered view”.

First things first, it was a major speech covering quite a wide range of areas. No doubt the media focus will be on the announcement around cutting the winter fuel payment for richest 5% of pensioners , but I think this somewhat misses the wider significance of the speech.

Nearly three years ago Ed Balls delivered his ‘Bloomberg speech’, rightly warning that the impact of the Government’s austerity programme would be disastrous. Two and half years later, the Shadow Chancellor has once again chosen a major City newswire to make an intervention in the economic debate. If ‘Bloomberg’ was about the economics of recession, then ‘Reuters’ is about the economics of an extremely weak recovery.

In my initial view there were two important takeaways from the speech. First, a subtle shift in Labour’s current economic position and second an argument about the kind of fiscal framework a Labour Government would work within.

Ed Balls argued that:

“Over the past two years, when the economy was totally stagnant, and when our economy has needed a quick and fast-acting shot in the arm, we have advocated a temporary VAT cut – alongside infrastructure spending, action on youth unemployment and targeted tax measures for business as part of our five point plan for growth.”

“Today, with growth prospects still very uncertain and interest rates too low to be of use, a temporary VAT cut now is still the right prescription before extra capital spending can come on stream – although any immediate tax cut which helps middle and lower income families is better than nothing.”

“But over the coming year if, as we all hope, some kind of recovery does take hold, then the balance of advantage will shift from temporary tax cuts to long-term capital investment.”

In other words, over 2011 and 2012 as the economy faced an acute demand problem, then Balls’ believes, that a temporary VAT cut (alongside other measures) was the most direct way to stimulate growth but, as we move into a weak and hesitant recovery, he now seems to be placing more emphasis on capital spending.

I suspect this is a sensible position to take. Recent research from the TUC has demonstrated how the Government’s slashing of its capital spending has led much of the recent downturn. Thousands of construction workers are unemployed, real wages in the sector have collapsed and if construction output had just remained flat over the last 5 quarters, growth would have been three times faster. A focus on boosting capital spending is the course recommended by the IMF.

Equally important, Labour’s argument that the best way to get to deal with the UK’s debt is through a short term increase in borrowing has always been a tough political sell, even if it makes perfect economic sense. By focussing on capital spending, Labour certainly strengthens its case. Research last month from NIESR demonstrated that in ‘crisis times,’ such as at present, then a 2% increase in government infrastructure spending (paid for through borrowing) not only boosts growth in the short and long run but also would lead to a lower debt/GDP ratio in the medium term. In other words, capital investment at the moment would be largely self financing.

A focus on capital spending can be seen as part of a shift in focus from short term stimulus towards longer term policies. Ed Balls’ speech built on this by talking of the need for a modern industrial policy alongside measures to increase long-termism in business and a focus on infrastructure, especially new affordable housing.

A temporary VAT gives the economy a much needed shot in the arm, but more capital spending not only boosts growth in the short run by putting people back to work it also gives the country important assets in the future – be it new homes, better transport or a more efficient energy infrastructure.

The other key point from the speech was Ed Balls’ refusal to sign up to the Government’s spending plans and his focus instead, on what he termed new ‘fiscal rules’.

“Instead, Labour will set out, in our general election manifesto, tough fiscal rules that the next Labour government will have to stick to – to get our country’s current budget back to balance and national debt on a downward path.

Tough rules, which will be independently monitored by the Office for Budget Responsibility.

A clear and balanced plan to support growth, alongside a clear timetable to get the deficit and the debt down – finishing the job where this Government has failed.”

The Government’s current fiscal framework has utterly failed. As I wrote last week:

“In effect the current fiscal framework is to eliminate the structural deficit in a rolling five year period that never actually bites.

In many ways this is the worst of all worlds, the short period of the target forces the government into making cuts too quickly which damage growth but the fact that the policy is so-flexible means the tomorrow never actually comes and so the period of cuts are continually extended. This is a recipe for continual austerity.

But the problems with the current framework don’t stop here. I would go further and argue that the structural deficit itself is the wrong target. The structural deficit is not something that can be measured, it is only something that can be estimated and those estimates are highly uncertain.”

The real debate is not whether parties sign up to a failed set of plans but what their alternative framework would look like. The Shadow Chancellor today hinted a plan that allows more flexibility to respond to economic conditions whilst focussing on reducing debt in the medium term. In macroeconomic terms, that sounds sensible.

There are many more details needed – details that will concern a great many. But in terms of major macroeconomic strategy, then today’s speech seems a step in the right direction.

  • philjvtaylor

    It was Alistair Darling in the 2009 Pre-Budget Report who cut investment in half. It was an easy way for him to be “prudent” without cutting current spending. It really is hard to know how Osborne could have reversed this in his June 2010 budget when the whole purpose of the Coalition was to tackle the deficit. At that time Osborne said:

    “We have faced many tough choices about the areas in which we should make additional savings, but I have decided that capital spending should not be one of them. There will be no further reductions in capital spending totals in this Budget.”

    Any Labour politician talking about lack of investment really is taking the Mickey.

  • postageincluded

    All well and good (and I can see everyone on all sides disagreeing) but if he’s going to get to no 11 to do it then the governments new “lobbying” proposals, aka the “Let’s end Union funding for Labour” Bill, needs to be stopped.

    In case anyone thinks there is no connection between these stories, remember that the government knows more than we do about just how sick the economy still is. They are pulling this trick not just because the opportunity has presented itself, but also because they know that the current “recovery” is merely synthetic – they’ll have nothing to show for their 5 years in 2015. They know they can’t win without cheating.

  • evad666

    No cut in winter fuel payments for immigrant Labour Voters.

  • Pingback: Three major things I’ve learnt from recent Labour speeches | Liberal Conspiracy

  • Pingback: Liberal Conspiracy: Three major things I’ve learnt from recent Labour speeches | moonblogsfromsyb

Latest

  • News Seats and Selections PPC selected in key marginal seat Great Grimsby

    PPC selected in key marginal seat Great Grimsby

    Today, Melanie Onn has been selected as Labour’s prospective parliamentary candidate (PPC), for key marginal seat Great Grimsby. Onn, who will stand as Labour’s candidate as current MP Austin Mitchell is stepping down, grew up in Grimsby and currently works as an organiser for UNISON. Prior to being selected, on her website she explained her reasons for wanting to be Labour’s candidate for the area: “Grimsby is the place that I am proud to call home. Grimsby is the place […]

    Read more →
  • Comment On policy, Labour needs to do to the NHS what it has done on rail and energy

    On policy, Labour needs to do to the NHS what it has done on rail and energy

    “A radical manifesto which transforms our society… A new settlement for our country”.  That was Angela Eagle’s promise to delegates in Milton Keynes last weekend and, in many areas, they will be happy with what has been agreed. One million new homes built over the next Parliament, a radical overhaul of the energy market, and part re-nationalisation of the rail network.  Put together and these ideas have the potential of forming a new settlement akin and worthy of those achieved […]

    Read more →
  • Comment The policies are great, but what about the money?

    The policies are great, but what about the money?

    After four years of massive cuts, 2015 is the year when council finances will start to fall off a cliff. Local government has borne the brunt of the cuts to public spending since 2010. My Council, Islington, typical of authorities in urban areas across the country, has lost 35% of its budget over the last four years. That’s a staggering £112 million. Councils have done a great job of coping with these cuts. My Council has gone through a process […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Londoners don’t want a staffless, soulless Tube system

    Londoners don’t want a staffless, soulless Tube system

    The London Underground is the single most important piece of public infrastructure in the capital. Over three million people use the Tube each day, to get to work, visit family or see friends. A healthy Underground network is at the heart of a healthy, vibrant London. It is a fantastic system that is the envy of the modern world, but we must ensure we do not neglect our crown jewel. Later  today, I will be addressing a conference on the […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Fairness dictates that we show concern for both sides

    Fairness dictates that we show concern for both sides

    We have all been shocked to see the surge in violence between Israel and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip. This conflict is causing enormous hardship on both sides. Particularly distressing is the sight of civilian casualties. The scale of human suffering in the current escalation is immense and every civilian casualty is a tragedy. The people of Gaza have the right to live in peace and freedom, just as Israelis have the right not to fear for […]

    Read more →