Government spending

Paul Johnson reflects on the recent history of Britain's economic policymaking in this piece published in the Times newspaper on 4 July 2015.

Paul Johnson, writing for The Conversation, says that the recent general election offered the electorate a big fiscal choice over dealing with the deficit, but we weren’t confronted with the big, longer term choices that we will have to make in response to growing pressures created by an ageing population. By 2020 public spending will be much more focused on health and pensions than it was in the year 2000. That trend will continue in the coming decades and it will mean tough choices on overall spending, tax rises and spending on health and pensions.

The Chancellor has announced £3bn of cuts to departmental spending this year. In an article for the Local Government Chronicle, David Innes and Gemma Tetlow look at what this might mean for local authorities.

This week has seen various statements by public figures about borrowing and debt. George Osborne announced that the government will legislate to require the UK government to run a budget surplus ‘in normal times’. Meanwhile, the Scottish National Party have tabled an amendment to the Scotland Bill to open up the possibility of full fiscal autonomy for Scotland, arguing that – even if this meant running a deficit in Scotland – this would be possible because ‘the UK has been in deficit in 43 of the last 50 years’. So what level of borrowing can or should the UK or Scotland have in the longer-run?

The Conservative Party manifesto committed to eliminate the deficit by 2018–19, largely through reductions in public spending. David Cameron has implied that these cuts would be relatively easy to achieve because they mean “saving £1 a year in every £100 that government spends”. Unfortunately, growth in some areas of spending, and promises to protect other areas, mean that even if the government delivers on its commitment to find £12 billion of cuts to social security spending, unprotected departmental spending could be facing cuts of 15% over the next three years. Ahead of next month’s Budget and Spending Review to follow, this Observation – and an associated presentation given at an event jointly organised with the Institute for Government – sets out what departments should be preparing themselves for.

This presentation was given at a event run jointly with the Institute for Government, 'The 2015 Budget and Spending Review: An IFS and IfG background briefing' on 4 June 2015.

The Conservatives’ victory in the general election means that we should shortly find out how they will find the additional benefit cuts to which they have committed. This observation, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, briefly summarises previous IFS analysis of the context for these choices and the kinds of options that are on the table.

This presentation was delivered for a seminar at the College of Policing, Harrogate, on 19 May 2015. It was also given at the Home Office on 23 April 2015 and at the University of Sussex on 20 May 2015.

IFS Director Paul Johnson highlights crucial gaps in the information underpinning economic and fiscal election pledges from both Labour and the Conservatives in this comment piece published in the Daily Mail newspaper.

This commentary was published in the Local Government Chronicle online on 28 April 2015 and in print on 30 April 2015.

This article was written for the National Council for Research Methods (NCRM)'s newsletter

Presented at the 'Manifesto analysis: the public finances' event at IFS.

Presented at the 'Manifesto analysis: the public finances' event at IFS.

Paul Johnson raises questions about manifesto pledges on tax revenues in a piece published in the Times newspaper today.

Gemma Tetlow contributes to an article by Tim Harford, published in the Financial Times' FT Magazine on 17 April 2015.

This presentation was given in a special session at the CIPFA Scotland Public Finance Conference on 26 March 2015.