This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/23/uk-no-earnings-growth-budget-brexit-productivity-ifs

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
UK faces two decades of no earnings growth, IFS warns UK faces two decades of no earnings growth, IFS warns
(about 3 hours later)
The UK is in danger of suffering two decades of zero earnings growth as it struggles to cope with Brexit uncertainty and a loss of productivity, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has warned. Britain’s leading financial thinktank has warned workers to expect an unprecedented two lost decades of earnings growth and many more years of austerity as a result of the marked slowdown in the economy announced in Philip Hammond’s budget.
The thinktank said a downgrade in productivity and average wages for the next five years by the Treasury’s official forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), would lead to an unprecedented period of flat earnings growth. The Institute for Fiscal Studies said in its traditional post-budget analysis that new forecasts slashing productivity, earnings and growth in every year until 2022 made “pretty grim reading”, and predicted that even by the middle of the next decade Britain’s public finances would still be in the red.
Paul Johnson, the IFS director, warned that the impact on the public finances would be to extend the time the chancellor needs to take to bring the deficit down, and limit his scope to ease the pressure on welfare and public services. The Treasury said the reforms and investment announced by the chancellor were designed to build a country “fit for the future” but opposition parties said the gloomy IFS report undermined Hammond’s claims.
In its analysis of the budget and the report from the independent Office for Budget Responsibility, the IFS said:
GDP per person will be 3.5% smaller in 2021 than forecast less than two years ago in March 2016. The loss of growth will mean that the economy is £65bn smaller than previously thought in 2021.
Average earnings are set to be £1,400 a year lower in 2021 than forecast in 2016. That means the recovery in wages will have failed to materialise and average earnings will be below their 2008 level adjusted for inflation.
Borrowing will be £12bn higher in 2021 than was forecast in March.
Despite a boost to spending over the next five years, the NHS is facing its tightest spending constraints since the 1980s. Annual spending growth of 4% a year after inflation before the financial crisis has fallen to 1% a year at a time when the NHS is being stretched by an expanding and ageing population.
Paul Johnson, the IFS director, said the OBR’s decision to reduce its growth forecasts by a quarter over the next five years would delay deficit reduction, limit Hammond’s ability to ease pressure on welfare and public services and hit living standards.
“We are in danger of losing not just one but getting on for two decades of earnings growth” Johnson said.
“We will all have to get used to the idea that steadily rising living standards may be a thing of the increasingly distant past,” he added.
The nascent recovery in earnings, which were growing through 2014 to the first half of 2016, had been choked off, Johnson said. “That they might still be below their 2008 level in 2022 as the OBR forecasts is truly astonishing. Let’s hope this forecast turns out to be too pessimistic.”
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell said the IFS analysis “exposed the appalling failure of seven years of this government’s austerity economics and its grim consequences for working people”.
He added: “Seven years of austerity has not only blighted lives and plunged our public services into crisis, it has also trashed productivity growth and dragged down living standards.
“This is a government and an economic policy that has completely failed by any conventional standard, they can serve no further purpose in office. ”
The Liberal Democrats said the chancellor was bringing down the public spending deficit by “balancing the books on the backs of the poorest”.
Although Hammond announced extra money for the NHS and scrapped stamp duty for first-time housebuyers in his budget, the package was overshadowed by the OBR’s announcement that the economy would never recover from the damage caused by the financial crisis and its aftermath. It put longterm productivity growth at 1%, down from 2% before the crash.
A Treasury spokesman said an increase in the National Living Wage would be worth an extra £600 a year to low income workers, while freezing fuel duty for the eighth year in a row and raising the income tax personal threshold would support hard-pressed families.
“The only way to improve living standards in the long term is to improve our productivity, which is why we are investing £30bn across the country in new infrastructure and skills, and delivering an ambitious industrial strategy,” he said.
Productivity is an economic measure of the efficiency of a workforce. It typically measures the level of output per hour of work, or per worker.Productivity is an economic measure of the efficiency of a workforce. It typically measures the level of output per hour of work, or per worker.
A more productive workforce signals stronger growth and healthier public finances. Productivity gains are vital to economic prosperity because it signals that more is being achieved by workers in less time. Gains are typically achieved through advances in technology and increased skill levels within a workforce.A more productive workforce signals stronger growth and healthier public finances. Productivity gains are vital to economic prosperity because it signals that more is being achieved by workers in less time. Gains are typically achieved through advances in technology and increased skill levels within a workforce.
In the UK, productivity growth has stalled since the financial crisis, putting it behind international rivals. The UK ranks fifth out of G7 leading industrial nations, with Canada and Japan having weaker levels of productivity. Germany is the most productive nation per hour, while the US is top for output per worker.In the UK, productivity growth has stalled since the financial crisis, putting it behind international rivals. The UK ranks fifth out of G7 leading industrial nations, with Canada and Japan having weaker levels of productivity. Germany is the most productive nation per hour, while the US is top for output per worker.
Weak productivity is problematic because it signals weaker economic growth, therefore eroding the public finances. Without an improvement in productivity, economies miss out on increases in wages and living standards, putting further pressure on the welfare system and depressing tax receipts.Weak productivity is problematic because it signals weaker economic growth, therefore eroding the public finances. Without an improvement in productivity, economies miss out on increases in wages and living standards, putting further pressure on the welfare system and depressing tax receipts.
Some industries are more productive than others. In the UK, manufacturing firms are among the most efficient, whereas the services sector operate at below average productivity.Some industries are more productive than others. In the UK, manufacturing firms are among the most efficient, whereas the services sector operate at below average productivity.
While the NHS was due to receive a funding increase, the government’s main austerity plans were still in place, he said. Johnson said that despite the extra cash for the NHS the government’s main austerity plans were still in place.
This is not the end of austerity. It is not even nearly the end of austerity. There are still nearly £12bn of welfare cuts to work through the system, while day-to-day public services spending is still due to be 3.6% lower in 2022-23 than it is today.” “This is not the end of austerity. It is not even nearly the end of austerity. There are still nearly £12bn of welfare cuts to work through the system, while day-to-day public services spending is still due to be 3.6% lower in 2022-23 than it is today.”
To keep public services spending per head constant over the next five years would require a budget increase of £13bn more to 2022-23 than currently planned, he added. Hammond appeared to have satisfied his Conservative colleagues, by avoiding politically controversial measures which then have to be unpicked – as in March when his planned increase in national insurance contributions for the self-employed was ditched within a week. “It seems fine: it’s not unravelled which is a win at the moment,” said one senior Tory, adding, “we plough on.”
In forecasts to accompany the budget, the OBR said it expected GDP growth to remain below 2% for the next five years given the weaker outlook for productivity and wages. The chancellor held scores of face-to-face meetings with Tory MPs in the run-up to Wednesday’s statement to allow them to voice their concerns, and was well-received at the 1922 committee of backbenchers afterwards.Former Treasury permanent secretary Nick Macpherson said: “There are some perfectly sensible policies in this budget. The sad thing is they will have very little impact because they are so small. It’s a perfectly reasonable political choice – you’ve got to fill up a budget speech, and there’s always that choice between one big measure and spreading your largesse rather more thinly, and that is what the chancellor has done. It makes perfect sense in political terms: perhaps less sense in economic terms.”
“The immediate effects of all this on households are already being felt. Real earnings are falling this year as inflation has risen to 3%. The nascent recovery in earnings, which were growing through 2014 to the first half of 2016, has been choked off. That they might still be below their 2008 level in 2022 as the OBR forecast is truly astonishing. Let’s hope this forecast turns out to be too pessimistic,” Johnson said. Macpherson, who ran the Treasury until last year,added that abolishing stamp duty was best understood as a sweetener for Conservative voters. “I wouldn’t get too hung up on the impact on transactions and first-time buyers: this is a relieving tax on the government’s core supporters. The vast majority of young people can’t afford to buy any house and probably won’t for many years to come; but the proportion of the population who can – no doubt with the help of their parents – stump up the odd £250-300,000, is the sweet spot of Tory middle England. So people who claim it’s bad value for money get it slightly wrong. It’s all about shoring up political support.”
Earlier this month, the IFS said welfare cuts already in the pipeline affecting households with young families would mean the number of children living in poverty soaring by 1 million to a record 5.2 million over the next five years.
The IFS said freezing benefits, the introduction of universal credit and less generous tax credits would mean a surge in child poverty and the steepest increases would be in the most deprived parts of the country, reversing the progress made over the past 20 years.