1. So, people are comparing Phillip Hammond’s suggestion of a new budget to George Osborne’s Brexit budget, and I think #Budget2018 may be a good day to demolish a persistent Brexit myth...
uk.businessinsider.com/chancellor-ham…
uk.businessinsider.com/chancellor-ham…
2. Commonly people say that George Osborne’s “punishment budget” was just a lie, and the proof that it was just scaremongering can be found in the fact it didn’t happen.
To understand why this is a myth, we need to actually read it.
To understand why this is a myth, we need to actually read it.
3. These are the first two pages. The front page definitely looks official and ‘budgety’. The second page is blank aside from a nice fancy border.
(I will be going through every page. Don’t worry it’s really short, unlike…you know…an actual budget)
(I will be going through every page. Don’t worry it’s really short, unlike…you know…an actual budget)
4. On the third page is the executive summary. It begins referring to the economic consensus that there would be uncertainty and volatility in the financial market after Brexit, and that this will damage the UK economy.
5. It then goes on to say this budget takes the midpoint of the IFS estimates and “shows the types of trade-offs involved in dealing with such a deficit in 2019-20”.
(Note: We are not even in the period this document represents yet)
(Note: We are not even in the period this document represents yet)
6. Page four and five goes on to discuss the IFS, their methodology, and presents their projections.
7. Page six covers the outcome of the treasury’s own forecast and similarly presents their projections.
8. Page seven shows a scorecard that “gives an illustrative example of the sorts of difficult decisions that would be required to deal with a £30 billion deterioration in the public finances.”
9. Page eight is the last page and is blank bar the same fancy border and a reference to the Britain Stronger in Europe campaign.
10. There is absolutely no suggestion in this document that anything is going to happen. It is simply a document of cause and effect that explains to the public that, if the economists are right, the government will have to make difficult decisions.
11. Not only does it not commit to anything, it was for a period of time that is still in the future.
12. It is also important to note that after this non-budget was published, Eurosceptic politicians said they would defeat it in the commons.
theguardian.com/politics/2016/…
theguardian.com/politics/2016/…
13. Which suggests that 57 Tory MPs, people like Iain Duncan Smith, Liam Fox, Owen Paterson, David Jones, and John Redwood, would all vote against the government balancing the budget in the event of serious economic damage.
14. Or they were just trying to manipulate the electorate into believing this document was an actual budget, and the Chancellor intended to implement the scorecard purely because people voted one way.
15. In reality, George Osborne’s Brexit budget wasn’t a budget, and instead was a clumsy, ill-considered, campaign stunt that Eurosceptics seized on to manipulate the public by arguing it was a promise to “punish” the public for voting one way.
16. The uncomfortable truth is, if you thought that it was a real budget that didn’t get implement, then I’m afraid it’s because the Eurosceptic politicians did a very good job of deceiving you.
/End
/End
