Tories borrow more on average than Labour

[Kris]

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2...last-70-years/

[TISS]

Isn't this more to do with the fact we had a deficit of 157bn in 2009 which, when the Tories came took office in 2010, meant the debt was always going to rise rapidly until the deficit was brought under control?

[ninianclark]

Isn't this more to do with the fact we had a deficit of 157bn in 2009 which, when the Tories came took office in 2010, meant the debt was always going to rise rapidly until the deficit was brought under control?

Yes it is.


That deficit of 157bn - has been reducing - and now down to 57 bn. So it means we dont have to borrow 100 billion a year just to keep up with our lifestyle pre crash.

On the other hand Corbyn wants to spend how much - was it 250 billion or was it 650 billion ? - and do this based on putting up corporation tax. I think there is the difference between the 2 trains of thought - is it better to grow your economy to increase the tax take - or is it better to raise taxes to spend it ?

Ironically when tax was lowered the tax take went up - so I think there is your answer.
Reducing the deficit year on year whilst growing the economy would have been the chosen method under the conservatives. The spanner in the works is Brexit - so deficit reduction has been put on hold - to I think 2020 - which given the circumstances is the only option open to them

[life on mars]

Yes it is.


That deficit of 157bn - has been reducing - and now down to 57 bn. So it means we dont have to borrow 100 billion a year just to keep up with our lifestyle pre crash.

On the other hand Corbyn wants to spend how much - was it 250 billion or was it 650 billion ? - and do this based on putting up corporation tax. I think there is the difference between the 2 trains of thought - is it better to grow your economy to increase the tax take - or is it better to raise taxes to spend it ?

Ironically when tax was lowered the tax take went up - so I think there is your answer.
Reducing the deficit year on year whilst growing the economy would have been the chosen method under the conservatives. The spanner in the works is Brexit - so deficit reduction has been put on hold - to I think 2020 - which given the circumstances is the only option open to them

The bigger risk as I see it , if we undertake a huge borrowing programe for regeneration, the regeneration doesn't deliver its forecasted long term benefits, Brexit finally takes hold in two to three years time and we then need to borrow more to stabilise the markets , and boom, we are in a deficit bigger than you can imagine .

I just think we are in uncertain times and caution not spending promises are key to our immediate future.

[CardiffIrish2]

That stupid ****ing referendum has a lot to answer for.

[Eric Cartman]

The bigger risk as I see it , if we undertake a huge borrowing programe for regeneration, the regeneration doesn't deliver its forecasted long term benefits, Brexit finally takes hold in two to three years time and we then need to borrow more to stabilise the markets , and boom, we are in a deficit bigger than you can imagine .

I just think we are in uncertain times and caution not spending promises are key to our immediate future.

It feels like almost every key service is 'just about managing', whether that is just dramatic rhetoric I don't know. It feels like a bad brexit deal for financial services could be the beginning of a complete and utter **** up for the UK.

[the other bob wilson]

Yes it is.


That deficit of 157bn - has been reducing - and now down to 57 bn. So it means we dont have to borrow 100 billion a year just to keep up with our lifestyle pre crash.

On the other hand Corbyn wants to spend how much - was it 250 billion or was it 650 billion ? - and do this based on putting up corporation tax. I think there is the difference between the 2 trains of thought - is it better to grow your economy to increase the tax take - or is it better to raise taxes to spend it ?

Ironically when tax was lowered the tax take went up - so I think there is your answer.
Reducing the deficit year on year whilst growing the economy would have been the chosen method under the conservatives. The spanner in the works is Brexit - so deficit reduction has been put on hold - to I think 2020 - which given the circumstances is the only option open to them

Blimey, thanks to you and Tiss for confirming that the writer of the piece in the OP was talking bollox - that natural order of things which says Conservatives = financial competence and boom times for all and Labour = financial chaos and misery for all has been restored after a nasty few hours when I believed that maybe the Tories weren't the economic and financial force of nature that we are told they are by the likes of the Mail and the Sun.

Even if there were any truth in what that Accountant and tax specialist wrote, we can rest safe in the knowledge that any veering off course by the Government can be put down to last year's referendum.

No doubt, what is said in these articles

https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...deficit-target

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-a6994016.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/w...-a3218261.html

https://fullfact.org/economy/did-geo...-deficit-year/

can, somehow, be blamed on Brexit as well.

Anyway, we all know that even if it is true that the average annual Government borrowing figure under Conservative Governments has been higher than under Labour administrations over the past seventy years, it's still all the fault of Labour isn't it!

[Eric Cartman]

Blimey, thanks to you and Tiss for confirming that the writer of the piece in the OP was talking bollox - that natural order of things which says Conservatives = financial competence and boom times for all and Labour = financial chaos and misery for all has been restored after a nasty few hours when I believed that maybe the Tories weren't the economic and financial force of nature that we are told they are by the likes of the Mail and the Sun.

Even if there were any truth in what that Accountant and tax specialist wrote, we can rest safe in the knowledge that any veering off course by the Government can be put down to last year's referendum.

No doubt, what is said in these articles

https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...deficit-target

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-a6994016.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/w...-a3218261.html

https://fullfact.org/economy/did-geo...-deficit-year/

can, somehow, be blamed on Brexit as well.

Anyway, we all know that even if it is true that the average annual Government borrowing figure under Conservative Governments has been higher than under Labour administrations over the past seventy years, it's still all the fault of Labour isn't it!

Let us not also forget that Brexit is not something that 'happened' to this government. Their MP's wanted to remain but they manipulated public opinion over Brexit to win an election. For that reason I would say 'blaming' brexit is a bit weak.

[life on mars]

It feels like almost every key service is 'just about managing', whether that is just dramatic rhetoric I don't know. It feels like a bad brexit deal for financial services could be the beginning of a complete and utter **** up for the UK.

It's the unknown, I note other contributors refer to Brexit as something that is being used as a weapon of fear ,in truth I don't think anyone knows the outcome , and on that point I feel we need to keep something in reserve, that might explain the last lame budget delivered by the Tories, I think they are on very uneasy ground ,our future is not in Mays hands it's in the hands of the other European countries, and let's be fair we ain't going to be handed a silver spoon tyoe deal ,as it would entice other referendums and Brexit types of result .

Perhaps the nuclear option of a two finger approach, and just leave without a deal may become the only outcome, now that will be a risky and rocky ride, as we trg and become a Singapore type economy to attract trade and investment.

I voted to stay in 🙄

[TISS]

Blimey, thanks to you and Tiss for confirming that the writer of the piece in the OP was talking bollox - that natural order of things which says Conservatives = financial competence and boom times for all and Labour = financial chaos and misery for all has been restored after a nasty few hours when I believed that maybe the Tories weren't the economic and financial force of nature that we are told they are by the likes of the Mail and the Sun.

Even if there were any truth in what that Accountant and tax specialist wrote, we can rest safe in the knowledge that any veering off course by the Government can be put down to last year's referendum.

No doubt, what is said in these articles

https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...deficit-target

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-a6994016.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/w...-a3218261.html

https://fullfact.org/economy/did-geo...-deficit-year/

can, somehow, be blamed on Brexit as well.

Anyway, we all know that even if it is true that the average annual Government borrowing figure under Conservative Governments has been higher than under Labour administrations over the past seventy years, it's still all the fault of Labour isn't it!

Don't you think the average has been skewed by the deficit being 157bn in 2009 and only being halved in the past 8 years?

What would the average be if the Tories inherited a surplus in 2010 like the Tories left Labour in 1997?

[TISS]

Let us not also forget that Brexit is not something that 'happened' to this government. Their MP's wanted to remain but they manipulated public opinion over Brexit to win an election. For that reason I would say 'blaming' brexit is a bit weak.

Cameron will quite rightly be remembered as a one of the worst prime minister's we have ever had. His thinking that he couldn't lose the referendum, putting party before People, is one of the worst political decisions made by any prime minister

[the other bob wilson]

Don't you think the average has been skewed by the deficit being 157bn in 2009 and only being halved in the past 8 years?

What would the average be if the Tories inherited a surplus in 2010 like the Tories left Labour in 1997?

The average has definitely been affected by what has happened since 2008, but the author then discounted the last eight years and, although the difference in the averages was a lot less, the Tories still borrowed more than Labour during the period 1946/2008.

[Pearcey3]

The average has definitely been affected by what has happened since 2008, but the author then discounted the last eight years and, although the difference in the averages was a lot less, the Tories still borrowed more than Labour during the period 1946/2008.

Precisely.The Tories are far better than Labour when it comes to propaganda. There have been more recessions under Tory Governments than there have been under Labour. The economy being safer under the Tories is a myth.
It will not surprise me if we have another Tory induced recession over the next two or three years.

[Pearcey3]

The average has definitely been affected by what has happened since 2008, but the author then discounted the last eight years and, although the difference in the averages was a lot less, the Tories still borrowed more than Labour during the period 1946/2008.

Cameron will quite rightly be remembered as a one of the worst prime minister's we have ever had. His thinking that he couldn't lose the referendum, putting party before People, is one of the worst political decisions made by any prime minister

Agreed cowardice by Cameron not to face down his raving right wingers followed by arrogance thinking he could blag his way through the EU referendum campaign.Still his Big Society idea worked a treat.

[TISS]

Precisely.The Tories are far better than Labour when it comes to propaganda. There have been more recessions under Tory Governments than there have been under Labour. The economy being safer under the Tories is a myth.
It will not surprise me if we have another Tory induced recession over the next two or three years.

Of course there have been more recessions under the tories. That's because they have been in power longer

[TISS]

Precisely.The Tories are far better than Labour when it comes to propaganda. There have been more recessions under Tory Governments than there have been under Labour. The economy being safer under the Tories is a myth.
It will not surprise me if we have another Tory induced recession over the next two or three years.

There are many reasons why the average over time is meaninglessness, the economic cycle, the time cost of money, the state of the economy that is inherited.

Both sides of the political spectrum use whatever stats they can to prove whatever argument they feel discredits the other side

[Pearcey3]

Of course there have been more recessions under the tories. That's because they have been in power longer

True but overall their record is no better yet they have managed down the decades to secure an undeserved recommendation for being a safe pair of hands on the economy

[Alfonso Perez]

Agreed cowardice by Cameron not to face down his raving right wingers followed by arrogance thinking he could blag his way through the EU referendum campaign.Still his Big Society idea worked a treat.

Cameron has a lot to answer for but so have lot's of others in my view, including Corbyn who I am convinced has been telling porkies about wanting to remain as his actions during & after the referendum strongly suggest to me that he wants to leave. I am surprised that such a strongly principled man did not have the courage to show his true colours although I suppose Jeremy has been on a journey as Emily Thornberry put it.

As for Boris, Gove, & Farage their campaign was full of holes (& lot's of the brown stuff!) but unfortunately a dis-united remain campaign was unable to take advantage.

In Wales the campaign (or lack of one) run by Carwyn Jones & Leanne Wood was shambolic which resulted in a lot of their core voters choosing to leave. It is crazy to think that some of these communities benefit significantly from EU money so putting up a robust argument should have been relatively easy but clearly not for Carwyn & Leanne. They have put a lot of effort into moaning since the referendum but it's a pity that this effort was not matched before the vote. If Wales had voted to remain, like Scotland & N Ireland, I am certain that the UK government would be having a far rougher ride over brexit than it currently is.

So pointing the finger solely at Cameron is unfair in my view as there are lot's of others who should also take a long hard look at themselves.

[Pearcey3]

Cameron has a lot to answer for but so have lot's of others in my view, including Corbyn who I am convinced has been telling porkies about wanting to remain as his actions during & after the referendum strongly suggest to me that he wants to leave. I am surprised that such a strongly principled man did not have the courage to show his true colours although I suppose Jeremy has been on a journey as Emily Thornberry put it.

As for Boris, Gove, & Farage their campaign was full of holes (& lot's of the brown stuff!) but unfortunately a dis-united remain campaign was unable to take advantage.

In Wales the campaign (or lack of one) run by Carwyn Jones & Leanne Wood was shambolic which resulted in a lot of their core voters choosing to leave. It is crazy to think that some of these communities benefit significantly from EU money so putting up a robust argument should have been relatively easy but clearly not for Carwyn & Leanne. They have put a lot of effort into moaning since the referendum but it's a pity that this effort was not matched before the vote. If Wales had voted to remain, like Scotland & N Ireland, I am certain that the UK government would be having a far rougher ride over brexit than it currently is.

So pointing the finger solely at Cameron is unfair in my view as there are lot's of others who should also take a long hard look at themselves.

He was the one who had the power to face down his rightwingers.Instead he was weak and took a huge gamble by going for a Referendum.He put party before country.
Agree others were pretty hopeless especially the current PM who went into hiding.

[Eric Cartman]

Cameron has a lot to answer for but so have lot's of others in my view, including Corbyn who I am convinced has been telling porkies about wanting to remain as his actions during & after the referendum strongly suggest to me that he wants to leave. I am surprised that such a strongly principled man did not have the courage to show his true colours although I suppose Jeremy has been on a journey as Emily Thornberry put it.

As for Boris, Gove, & Farage their campaign was full of holes (& lot's of the brown stuff!) but unfortunately a dis-united remain campaign was unable to take advantage.

In Wales the campaign (or lack of one) run by Carwyn Jones & Leanne Wood was shambolic which resulted in a lot of their core voters choosing to leave. It is crazy to think that some of these communities benefit significantly from EU money so putting up a robust argument should have been relatively easy but clearly not for Carwyn & Leanne. They have put a lot of effort into moaning since the referendum but it's a pity that this effort was not matched before the vote. If Wales had voted to remain, like Scotland & N Ireland, I am certain that the UK government would be having a far rougher ride over brexit than it currently is.

So pointing the finger solely at Cameron is unfair in my view as there are lot's of others who should also take a long hard look at themselves.

I am not entirely sure what your point is regarding Corbyn? He should have said he was a leaver so everyone would vote remain? That might have actually worked.

The referendum was Cameron's baby, he used it to win an election thinking it couldn't backfire that is why he gets the blame.

[Eric Cartman]

He was the one who had the power to face down his rightwingers.Instead he was weak and took a huge gamble by going for a Referendum.He put party before country.
Agree others were pretty hopeless especially the current PM who went into hiding.

She did a Corbyn, but no special mention for her from Alfonso, how peculiar

[Alfonso Perez]

She did a Corbyn, but no special mention for her from Alfonso, how peculiar

What do you mean by that?

[Pearcey3]

She did a Corbyn, but no special mention for her from Alfonso, how peculiar

Everyone criticises Corbyn over this but never take May to task. Still at least she will ensure we leave the EU because its what the majority. Just like legalising fox hunting because its what the majority want.... oh!

[Eric Cartman]

What do you mean by that?

Well she is the most important person in British politics at the moment, she was a very prominent member of the Cameron's government and she went completely missing for the entirety of the referendum campaign. If you were trying to deliver a complete verdict you could have found a few words to apportion some blame to her too.

[Alfonso Perez]

Everyone criticises Corbyn over this but never take May to task. Still at least she will ensure we leave the EU because its what the majority. Just like legalising fox hunting because its what the majority want.... oh!

I was talking about the leaders in my post - Cameron as PM, Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party, Boris, Gove & Farage as leaders of the leave campaign, Carwyn Jones, leader of Welsh Labour & Leanne Wood, leader of Plaid Cymru - so why did I need to mention Theresa May??

[Eric Cartman]

Everyone criticises Corbyn over this but never take May to task. Still at least she will ensure we leave the EU because its what the majority. Just like legalising fox hunting because its what the majority want.... oh!

I can't move for all the foxes. Isn't that what 'project fear' promised us as a result of the hunting ban?

[Eric Cartman]

I was talking about the leaders in my post - Cameron as PM, Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party, Boris, Gove & Farage as leaders of the leave campaign, Carwyn Jones, leader of Welsh Labour & Leanne Wood, leader of Plaid Cymru - so why did I need to mention Theresa May??

Because she was a prominent remainer who went missing, her career since has flourished because of it. Just picking the leaders doesn't make much sense, Corbyn had nothing to do with Labours remain campaign.

Personally I don't think the campaigns made much difference (I wouldn't blame May, Corbyn, Cameron or anyone for their campaigning), everyone I spoke to in the run up knew exactly how they were going to vote and were practically ignoring the politicians on this one. The reason I blame Cameron is because he (against advice from within his own party) decided to have a referendum in order to win the election.

[Rjk]

Isn't this more to do with the fact we had a deficit of 157bn in 2009 which, when the Tories came took office in 2010, meant the debt was always going to rise rapidly until the deficit was brought under control?

Is that the defecit that the Tories said they would get rid of within 4 years.
8 years later and we are still 4 years away from achieving that and they have laid waste to our public services in the meantime.

[LordKenwyne]

This exact article is dragged up all the time.

It is pointless really. The economy is never a level playing field. It is never the same.

A comment under it:

In your analysis you acknowledge that whoever was in power post 2008 was going to have to borrow more. You also acknowledge that this would distort the results of your analysis and adjust the data to make for a fairer comparison.

However the conservatives were in power for most of the post WWII (1951-1964) rebuilding period. Another period when whoever was in power would also have had to borrow lots. How come you have made no attempt to adjust for this? The impact of rebuilding the country post WWII will have had an impact on government borrowing that was very similar in magnitude to the Global Financial Crisis.

Doesn’t this possibly lead to the classic mistake of assuming correlation = causation. The Tories happened to have been in power when the economy required massive amounts of government borrowing, rather than the Tories being a party of higher government borrowing.

[the other bob wilson]

This exact article is dragged up all the time.

It is pointless really. The economy is never a level playing field. It is never the same.

A comment under it:

In your analysis you acknowledge that whoever was in power post 2008 was going to have to borrow more. You also acknowledge that this would distort the results of your analysis and adjust the data to make for a fairer comparison.

However the conservatives were in power for most of the post WWII (1951-1964) rebuilding period. Another period when whoever was in power would also have had to borrow lots. How come you have made no attempt to adjust for this? The impact of rebuilding the country post WWII will have had an impact on government borrowing that was very similar in magnitude to the Global Financial Crisis.

Doesn’t this possibly lead to the classic mistake of assuming correlation = causation. The Tories happened to have been in power when the economy required massive amounts of government borrowing, rather than the Tories being a party of higher government borrowing.

Spoken like a true Tory Chancellor .

[ninianclark]

Spoken like a true Tory Chancellor .

Every comment here - for and against - is entirely predictable. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32288751

All I would go on is my experience :-

In the 70's - I remember the 3 day week , the miners strikes, secondary picketing and the council bin strikes with rubbish piling up. I also remember Thatcher and the divisiveness it caused , I also remember the 80's (leaving the bad music to one side) , I remember an economy on the up - on the whole, I also remember the riots. I worked for the council and then got a job in the private sector

In the 90's - I remember a bit of a recession in the early 90's - it didnt affect me - as I had a secure job. Mid 90's I setup my own company and was then responsible for my own destiny, finding customers, getting paid, paying a mortgage, travelling wherever to get work etc.

I remember Blair getting voted in (glad about that as the Tory Govt of the time was split down the middle). Tony Blair was good for me - with massive borrowing and spending by Labour - there was continuous work - some public some private sector. I voted against Blair in 2003 - because of Iraq and the subsequent total disaster it caused directly up to ISIS now.

Labour seemed to be going the same way as the previous Tory Govt of Major - split. Then we all discovered Gordon Browns trick - the massive spending was built on sand and PFI. Blair "go and get me immigrants from anywhere and let them all in", then we had him wanting to join the Euro (thank feck for Brown on this one). Tuition fees and a seemingly megalomaniac in charge and an economic plan which seemed to based on tax and spend (again) - it doesnt work in the long run.

I liked to Tory / Coalition idea - although they were always going to be completely hamstrung by the complete disaster left to them by the previous Labour Govt (not entirely their own fault - but they certainly didnt help) The Libs idea of 12k tax threshold compared to what it used to be - was great for kids on the step ladder of employment.

Clegg learned an important lesson early doors - he promised to get rid of tuition fees - yet when he had the power to do it - he admitted he couldnt do it - funny how the reality of power makes the opposition BS disappear.

Skip forward to today - your choice is vote for a man who has never held office, never been on the Govt or Opposition front bench and never run a dept etc OR vote for someone who was Home Secretary for a record 6 years - and didnt get sacked.

No matter what the political parties tell you - the people will have 2 questions when they vote - is the person trustworthy, do you think they can do the job. If you can get past those 2 barriers - then people will trust what you say - and you can talk about all the other stuff.

If you dont have their trust and dont appear to be competent in the job - then you can talk till the cows come home - people wont vote for you.

[LordKenwyne]

Spoken like a true Tory Chancellor .

What the truth?.

On a side note, someone I know was talking about "what if" a labour victory on the weekend.

Whether it would be good or bad long term I don't know, but imagine the state of the £ that morning.

I looked at tickets for an event on a holiday I am due to go on in the summer. 75 euros it costs. Comes out to over 60 pound sterling. Jesus wept!.

[TISS]

Well she is the most important person in British politics at the moment, she was a very prominent member of the Cameron's government and she went completely missing for the entirety of the referendum campaign. If you were trying to deliver a complete verdict you could have found a few words to apportion some blame to her too.

you could argue that by being quiet she was biding her time. it wouldn't be a tough argument to win.

what I don't get is this fawning of Corbyn as a man of principle. The guy is a hypocrite.

Whilst a backbencher Corbyn continuously revolted and ignored the party whip, voting according to his conscience. Yet as soon as he has a sniff of power Corbyn expected party members to tow the line or lose the whip.

[TISS]

Is that the defecit that the Tories said they would get rid of within 4 years.
8 years later and we are still 4 years away from achieving that and they have laid waste to our public services in the meantime.

it sure is the same deficit. this just goes to show how wildly inaccurate such forecasts can be and when faced with a general election, voters should give such predictions limited weight.

[Eric Cartman]

you could argue that by being quiet she was biding her time. it wouldn't be a tough argument to win.

what I don't get is this fawning of Corbyn as a man of principle. The guy is a hypocrite.

Whilst a backbencher Corbyn continuously revolted and ignored the party whip, voting according to his conscience. Yet as soon as he has a sniff of power Corbyn expected party members to tow the line or lose the whip.

We must live in different worlds because I don't know anyone who is fawning over Corbyn, the best I can find is people who don't care either way but can't understand why he gets the level of smear he does. Until the manifesto was leaked I was all set to vote green as a pure protest (there is actually a chance of them being 2nd in my completely safe Tory seat). I am torn now because there are parts of the (draft) manifesto which I really agree with and I know that once Corbyn goes and labour lurch towards the centre (that 'business friendly' cliche) these things will disappear. It is pretty clear that Corbyn is no leader but I would rather vote for ideas that I agree with than against one guy.