IFS: Only the Tories will balance the books. Watch

Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
Based on the little information given in the manifestos, the IFS now reckon that only the Conservatives will balance the books in the next 5 years (being back in the black 2018-19) while none of the other main parties will manage it.


Additionally, despite a few weeks ago many of the Labourites and lefties on this forum saying that the £3,000 extra tax per household is a load of crap, and that Labour can possibly balance with only the few taxes that have been announced, the IFS now seems to disagree, now reckoning taxes will increase by £12bn under Labour. Wouldn't quite render £3,000, but still not an inconsiderable amount, meanwhile the Tories will be cutting taxes by £4bn.

The report also point to an extra £90bn being borrowed by Labour as opposed to the Conservatives, and the increase in debt interest that comes with it. The Tories will leave Britain "better placed to deal with future financial shocks" due to the cutting of the debt, currently standing at ~80% of GDP. Under the Conservatives we can expect this to fall to 72%, 77% under Labour, who will also breach the Charter for Budget Responsibility.

In terms of real terms changes in public spending, the Tories will be cutting it by only £2.5bn, Labour will increase it by about £42bn, £3bn for the Lib Dems and £28bn under the SNP.

On the NHS, as we all know already, the Tories will increase spending by more than Labour, 7% boost under the Tories, 3.7% under Labour, although it is also said that in reality Labour would most probably be spending more than that, although they haven't yet committed to it.

Some slightly more surprising things found in the report are that, despite all the anti-austerity rhetoric, the SNP would end up cutting deeper than Labour, and the Tories would increase welfare 12 times is much as Labour would (12bn vs 1bn).

Also, somewhat interesting, is that Sturgeon has said that the report is wrong, with the biggest of her points being that they have understated the projected SNP borrowing...

And in a brief aside, on the basis of the £1.1m donated by unions to the Labour party during the week 6-12 April, the rate was equivalent to £1.22 PER SECOND.

Assorted sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32424739
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gene...k-holiday.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ing-plans.html

Not read it yet (about to start) the report itself:
http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/public.../bns/BN170.pdf
1
reply
Nirgilis
  • Study Helper
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
They're all on a downwards slope to be fair... :dontknow:
0
reply
Europhile
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
Funny how UKIP, with a fully costed manifesto, hasn't been included. It's hilarious that the SNP have been included, a party that isn't even nationwide, over a party like UKIP. Does suit the pro-establishment agenda though does it?
0
reply
MindTheGaps
Badges: 17
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Nirgilis)
They're all on a downwards slope to be fair... :dontknow:
But some more than others.
0
reply
username1862217
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by Europhile)
Funny how UKIP, with a fully costed manifesto, hasn't been included. It's hilarious that the SNP have been included, a party that isn't even nationwide, over a party like UKIP. Does suit the pro-establishment agenda though does it?
And the green party is missing. But, to be brutally honest, the green party's line wouldn't fit on there. It would go too high.
0
reply
Europhile
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by Keyhofi)
And the green party is missing. But, to be brutally honest, the green party's line wouldn't fit on there. It would go too high.
You would need an infinite scroll jquery plugin for the Greens.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by Europhile)
Funny how UKIP, with a fully costed manifesto, hasn't been included. It's hilarious that the SNP have been included, a party that isn't even nationwide, over a party like UKIP. Does suit the pro-establishment agenda though does it?
Well, UKIP are arguing that their exclusion is a good thing and it's because they had the costing done themselves, the inlcusion of the SNP also isn't surprising given that, for once, they will actually be relevant and because of the curiosities such as them being "worse" than labour in terms of austerity
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by Europhile)
Funny how UKIP, with a fully costed manifesto, hasn't been included. It's hilarious that the SNP have been included, a party that isn't even nationwide, over a party like UKIP. Does suit the pro-establishment agenda though does it?
It's highly unlikely that Ukip will be in government.. it's highly likely that those 4 will.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Based on the little information given in the manifestos, the IFS now reckon that only the Conservatives will balance the books in the next 5 years (being back in the black 2018-19) while none of the other main parties will manage it.


Additionally, despite a few weeks ago many of the Labourites and lefties on this forum saying that the £3,000 extra tax per household is a load of crap, and that Labour can possibly balance with only the few taxes that have been announced, the IFS now seems to disagree, now reckoning taxes will increase by £12bn under Labour. Wouldn't quite render £3,000, but still not an inconsiderable amount, meanwhile the Tories will be cutting taxes by £4bn.

The report also point to an extra £90bn being borrowed by Labour as opposed to the Conservatives, and the increase in debt interest that comes with it. The Tories will leave Britain "better placed to deal with future financial shocks" due to the cutting of the debt, currently standing at ~80% of GDP. Under the Conservatives we can expect this to fall to 72%, 77% under Labour, who will also breach the Charter for Budget Responsibility.

In terms of real terms changes in public spending, the Tories will be cutting it by only £2.5bn, Labour will increase it by about £42bn, £3bn for the Lib Dems and £28bn under the SNP.

On the NHS, as we all know already, the Tories will increase spending by more than Labour, 7% boost under the Tories, 3.7% under Labour, although it is also said that in reality Labour would most probably be spending more than that, although they haven't yet committed to it.

Some slightly more surprising things found in the report are that, despite all the anti-austerity rhetoric, the SNP would end up cutting deeper than Labour, and the Tories would increase welfare 12 times is much as Labour would (12bn vs 1bn).

Also, somewhat interesting, is that Sturgeon has said that the report is wrong, with the biggest of her points being that they have understated the projected SNP borrowing...

And in a brief aside, on the basis of the £1.1m donated by unions to the Labour party during the week 6-12 April, the rate was equivalent to £1.22 PER SECOND.

Assorted sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32424739
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gene...k-holiday.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ing-plans.html

Not read it yet (about to start) the report itself:
http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/public.../bns/BN170.pdf
Good to see the difference between the parties and the Tories achieving a proper surplus.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

It is really important for me to be involved in helping make my university better

Strongly disagree (4)
11.11%
Disagree (3)
8.33%
Neither agree or disagree (10)
27.78%
Agree (11)
30.56%
Strongly Agree (8)
22.22%

Watched Threads

View All