Not everything was done. The extension – instead of ending it early as planned by the chancellor – has prevented unemployment from reaching levels invisible since the time of political idol Nigel Lawson. However, the chancellor has reportedly disagreed with the Office of Budget Responsibility because it overshadowed his spring statement with dire financial forecasts. Anonymous sources told the Times that Sunak “absolutely hates OBR”, saying the Treasury Department meteorologist had made unknown “regulatory policy crises” – expressing a view on how things should be, rather than describing the prospects impartially. for the economy and the public. financially. Sources close to Sunak have downgraded the leak, suggesting that there is no truth in the anonymous information. However, it would fit a pattern. Leaks in another friendly newspaper showed that the chancellor was disappointed with the BBC. Away from the image of the smooth pilot of his first months at work, the gloss of the Sunak brand seems to be subtle. There are good reasons why the tide is changing. None of this is due to the fact that impartial bodies make an ideological turn to things. Unfortunately for the chancellor, the facts speak for themselves. The Treasury Department’s independent finance meteorologist had told the public that Britain was heading for its biggest annual decline in living standards since the mid-1950s, while Sunak was far from tax cuts he had announced. His spring statement promised the biggest net tax cuts in a quarter of a century. The OBR verdict, however, was clear: the tax burden would rise, not fall, to its highest level since Clement Attlee became prime minister in the late 1940s. At worst, these statements could be accused of being too colorful for an impartial body. Richard Hughes, the president of the OBR, is said by those who know him to be interested in such phenomena, ensuring that these predictions are perhaps more easily contained by his predecessor, Robert Chote. However, these tangles remain far from the norm. Such conditions could catch the attention of the media and risk overthrowing the chancellor. However, clear and relevant communication is vital to the transmission of financial issues to a wide audience. It would be nonsense to err on the side of caution about the fragile ego of a chancellor. Even so, owning one is still beyond the reach of the average person. Faced with intense pressure on living standards, a number of charities and think tanks have warned that poverty is about to skyrocket and have questioned the chancellor’s determination to do all she can to help those most at risk. Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, warned last week that the poorest in society would suffer more than the worst inflation shock since the 1970s. the bank’s. The ruling of the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Resolution Foundation could hardly have been clearer: Sunak has unique powers to mitigate families from the cost-of-living crisis, but he has chosen to prioritize pre-election tax cuts for tomorrow. tackling problems today. If Sunak was watching those who overshadowed him by pointing this out, he would indeed make a very long list. Without judging the appropriateness of his actions, the OBR said Sunak had offset only a third of the overall decline in living standards. He also said the chancellor still had 30 30 billion in fiscal power in the tank. You do not need a Treasurer to find out more. After all, Boris Johnson told the public just as much – acknowledging less than 24 hours after the spring statement that further action was needed. In defense of Sunak, the Guardian warned that relatively small changes in the financial outlook could eliminate this margin within the limits imposed by themselves on public finances. Debt interest costs are expected to jump to 83 83 billion next year – making it the fourth largest public spending item after the NHS, state pensions and education. Here, the chancellor may have wanted to focus public attention, in the spirit of George Osborne’s creation of the OBR as a form of barrier to public finances. Set up as a police officer to ensure the deficit was reduced over the course of 2010, the OBR – conveniently based in the Ministry of Justice – a short walk from the Treasury – was designed as a way to show that Osborne was serious about balancing books. Some were cynical about its founding. A senior policymaker said it was initially seen more as a ploy, believing the Tories wanted their Labor counterpart to grant the Bank of England operational independence in 1997. She has faced criticism for her political influence in the past, including Sunak, just last year, when she allegedly used outdated financial forecasts at his request. However, times have changed, both for OBR and for our collective economic priorities. It has become a vital principle for the economy, publishing clear reports when the Treasury Department may seek to bury bad news. Concerns today focus less on the risks to public finances and more on the effects on public welfare. “Honestly, we will never become Greece,” a senior policy-maker told me. According to the National Institute for Economic and Social Research, Britain needs to design a new fiscal framework to move away from a “fiscal” approach that looks at tax decisions and spending decisions in the light of arbitrary targets, on arbitrary dates. with the elections. In a world where excessive government policy works with the smoke and the mirror of political surprise and partial leakage, OBR is an important control and balance.
