British Conservatives must learn from failure

conservatives in power United kingdom Since May 2010. His track record has been terrible. This is partly due to adverse circumstances, but also because the party is captive to an outdated ideology. In general, each leader was worse than his predecessor.

Probably Rishi Sunak It would be “the Rashid” to break this sequence, but it is not ripe to promise strict controls on public spending only after the next election. It’s not great to reduce debt by cutting public investment or raise taxes through hidden border cuts. Adults should not promise cuts in the distant future. They need to focus on the balance sheet, not just liabilities, and they have to be honest.

After the damage caused by fiscal austerity George Osborne Conducted by the most vulnerable, the ill-advised referendum on Britain’s exit from the European Union in David CameronFailed negotiations Theresa MayBoris Johnson’s lies and follies Les Truss s Quasi QuartingSunak should do something much better. The long period of sluggish productivity growth and stagnant real disposable income makes this all the more urgent. For Sunak, imposing another round of austerity is not enough to save money, especially since this often hurts the poorest at a time when prices are rising.

The party must learn from its failures. If you don’t want to do it from the opposition, you should do it while you are in government. Tim Peet provided an excellent summary of what conservatives need to learn (and forget) in a recent handbook. He stresses in particular that conservatives were successful for so long because they did not have a fixed ideology. He suggests that they have four overlapping principles: pragmatism, stewardship, ‘one nation’ and ’empowerment’. The crucial point is that the capacity of the state and the cohesion of society must always be important to conservatives. Today is very different from 1979. Thatcherism is the idea of ​​a “zombie”.

See also  Keys to the 'Partygate' scandal report

Nowhere is this more correct when considering the future role and size of the state. The truth is that it is likely to grow faster than the economy. This is also entirely possible, as long as the economy also indicates growth, but if the country is likely to grow, then the tax burden must grow as well.

Why does the state tend to grow faster than the economy? First, the economy needs a well-educated and healthy workforce. Secondly, the services provided by the state are those in which it is difficult to increase productivity. Third, spending on remittances and health will increase as the proportion of the elderly and sick increases in the population. Finally, more spending on remittances and essential services is also what voters are asking for.

Taxes should increase in proportion to GDP. The only alternative is for the state to abandon important obligations or pretend to promise what people expect, while offering a worse standard. Fortunately, a higher tax burden is not an insurmountable problem, as the level is relatively low compared to its European counterparts. In addition, many of these countries with the highest tax burden are richer than them United kingdom. in data Conference Board It shows that the purchasing power of GDP per capita in Denmark was 32 percent higher, 29 percent higher in the Netherlands, and Germany 22 percent higher than the United Kingdom in 2021.

The big question is how to increase revenue. The big difference seems to lie in Social Security rates, which are low in United kingdom. In fact, it is just another form of income tax, but it may work better politically. Other tariffs can also be increased: on land, on real estate, donations and greenhouse gas emissions.

See also  The UK will seek to enter into the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement

Some would argue that all this will kill growth. If so, why are so many countries with higher taxes so much richer? The determinants of savings, investment and innovation must be better understood. Taxes are important, but they are not the only important thing. It will be possible to increase revenue while improving overall economic dynamism.

As Pete notes, productivity has increased at an annual rate of just 0.4 percent since the financial crisis. The conservatives were in power almost the entire time. Moreover, the economy remains largely the same as that left by Thatcher, with a relatively modest tax burden. This is not enough. Conservatives must learn from failure. How will the country combine the country it wants with the dynamic economy it needs? This is the question that Snack must answer. You must do the same Care StarmerLabor Party leader. It is at the heart of UK policy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *