How bad will Autumn Statement be?

Photo of author

By Creative Media News

At this time of year, staying under the blanket is always enticing, and a consideration of what lies ahead may justify a desire to go to a distant location.

The good news is that Nasa said this weekend on our show that humanity will be living on the moon within a decade. Consequently, there may be more extreme solutions available if you wish to run.

Here you can read about what NASA’s Howard Hu told me, and on Sunday you can watch the entire conversation.

How bad will autumn statement be?
How bad will autumn statement be?

However, lunar travel is still a few years away, and with the economy contracting and the government preaching pain as the price of stability, we must calculate how much all of this will harm the people, the public services, and the politicians.

Overall, the country has become poorer, and everyone will be affected in some way. Whoever or whoever you blame, the reality remains.

The precise amount and depth of the recession have yet to be determined. This year, though, every household will experience the largest decline in extra cash since right after World War II.

Put that into historical perspective:

  • It is a steeper decline than the financial crisis of the late 2000s when banks had to be bailed out and hundreds of people waited in line to withdraw their money.
  • It is worse than in the early 1980s when Mrs. Thatcher was in power.
  • It’s a steeper decline than in the turbulent mid-1970s.

Inflation is consuming our prosperity. And the independent figure crunchers at the IFS estimate that everybody earning above £9,000 will see their pay decrease as a result of the taxman taking more and more.

These increases are not accompanied by immediate reductions in government spending. And it’s crucial to note that the £30 billion decrease in spending expected for the coming years is merely a reduction from what had previously been projected, not a drop in total spending.

With inflation soaring, however, the available funds for essential services are severely constrained.

One secondary school principal informs me: “Staff and pupils have been instructed to dress warmer. I can only afford to have the heating on for two hours per day, and only if the temperature drops below 18C; otherwise, it’s off.”

They inform me that they have already had to expand class sizes, reduce extra support for students with special needs, and cannot afford to hire new personnel.

Currently, elements of our public services are already experiencing difficulty. A highly experienced NHS administrator, who is not prone to hyperbole, asserts that their A&E has “lines and lines and lines.”

In their region, general practice is “collapsing” and social care is a “disaster”; an estimated one-third of hospitalized patients would be able to return home if assistance were available.

As a result of Thursday’s Autumn Statement, health and education will receive additional funding to alleviate strains. However, the long-overdue reform of social care has been again postponed.

According to a senior minister, the government considers that public spending is still “a bit obese,” hence cuts should be found. A former cabinet minister, though, says there is nothing more to offer. They tell me, “Any sensible Secretary of State would declare there is nowhere to go; we cannot do this.”

Jeremy Hunt’s budget cuts are less severe than those of George Osborne a decade ago. It is also perfectly feasible (whisper it) that when it comes time to make cuts, more money appears suddenly down the back of the Whitehall sofa.

Perhaps the budget cuts slated for soon after the next election will never materialize.

It has been tempting for chancellors to delay their attempts to balance the budget.

After many years of spending constraints, the next round of cuts is unavoidable, and it appears that it will be difficult for those in charge of public services to accomplish more with less, which could be detrimental to those who rely on them.

But what about political suffering?

When Labour agrees with the general premise that there is a vacuum in the public finances that must be addressed, it is undoubtedly simpler for the government to make its argument.

With the departure of Jeremy Corbyn and Liz Truss, both Labour and the Conservatives are now in the mainstream of economic thought.

However, having been in power since 2010 and subjecting the nation to the brief, wild ride of Trussonomics, the Tories are already suffering in the polls.

No political party would want to promote the phrase “more taxes and inferior public services” on billboards or social media.

A tax-heavy argument is unlikely to win over conservatives.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to content