To paraphrase PG Wodehouse on Scotsmen with a grievance, it is not hard to distinguish between a Governor of the BoE and a ray of sunshine.
In his defence, Bailey argues that he is just being realistic, and reminding everyone of how much hard work still needs to be done before the economy can start growing again.
Too much during the pandemic, we have relied too heavily on immigration, our productivity has stagnated in the private sector while declining in the public, we are far too dependent on expensive imported energy despite having abundant resources within our own borders and marginal tax rates are punishing.
Far too many people, many of them over 50 or self-employed, have left the workforce.
Those are all genuine problems, none of which can be wished away with some rousing rhetoric. Yet it is impossible to imagine Jay Powell at the Federal Reserve or Christine Lagarde at the European Central Bank talking about their respective economies using such relentlessly downbeat terms.
They might expect a backlash, were they to find so few positives about the economies they were meant to be helping manage.
There are two big problems with Bailey’s negativity. First, it is clearly part of a Remainer, anti-growth narrative. As it happens, the UK is doing no worse than much of Europe, and in some ways slightly better.
Only this week we learned that both the German and French economies are contracting, and both may well be in a full-blown recession by early next year. Growth is sluggish right across the continent, and we are all being left behind by the US and parts of Asia.
It is ridiculous to pretend that the UK is some kind of outlier when looking at our close neighbours. On inward investment, closing the budget deficit, and completing trade deals with fast-growing Pacific nations, the UK is actually doing slightly better than some rivals.
By continually trashing the prospects for the UK, Bailey, whether consciously or not, is playing into the hands of a declinist establishment coalition that is determined to push the UK into a closer relationship with the EU once a Labour government takes power, as it almost certainly will, next year.
For that to work, the UK has to be portrayed as lost at sea, doomed, only capable of survival by binding itself to the rest of Europe.
The second issue is this. The Governor is deftly absolving himself of any responsibility for our predicament. The Bank of England is hardly blameless when it comes to the collapse of our potential for steady 2pc to 3pc annual growth.
It kept interest rates too low for too long, allowing zombie companies to stay afloat when they should have gone under years ago.
It printed far too much money after the financial crisis and later during the pandemic, enabling successive Chancellors to spend too much money on public services without a commensurate rise in output, and leaving us with a bloated welfare system.
Europe’s performance says it all: the UK deserves better than Bailey’s ‘realism’
[ad_1]
To paraphrase PG Wodehouse on Scotsmen with a grievance, it is not hard to distinguish between a Governor of the BoE and a ray of sunshine.
In his defence, Bailey argues that he is just being realistic, and reminding everyone of how much hard work still needs to be done before the economy can start growing again.
Too much during the pandemic, we have relied too heavily on immigration, our productivity has stagnated in the private sector while declining in the public, we are far too dependent on expensive imported energy despite having abundant resources within our own borders and marginal tax rates are punishing.
Far too many people, many of them over 50 or self-employed, have left the workforce.
Those are all genuine problems, none of which can be wished away with some rousing rhetoric. Yet it is impossible to imagine Jay Powell at the Federal Reserve or Christine Lagarde at the European Central Bank talking about their respective economies using such relentlessly downbeat terms.
They might expect a backlash, were they to find so few positives about the economies they were meant to be helping manage.
There are two big problems with Bailey’s negativity. First, it is clearly part of a Remainer, anti-growth narrative. As it happens, the UK is doing no worse than much of Europe, and in some ways slightly better.
Only this week we learned that both the German and French economies are contracting, and both may well be in a full-blown recession by early next year. Growth is sluggish right across the continent, and we are all being left behind by the US and parts of Asia.
It is ridiculous to pretend that the UK is some kind of outlier when looking at our close neighbours. On inward investment, closing the budget deficit, and completing trade deals with fast-growing Pacific nations, the UK is actually doing slightly better than some rivals.
By continually trashing the prospects for the UK, Bailey, whether consciously or not, is playing into the hands of a declinist establishment coalition that is determined to push the UK into a closer relationship with the EU once a Labour government takes power, as it almost certainly will, next year.
For that to work, the UK has to be portrayed as lost at sea, doomed, only capable of survival by binding itself to the rest of Europe.
The second issue is this. The Governor is deftly absolving himself of any responsibility for our predicament. The Bank of England is hardly blameless when it comes to the collapse of our potential for steady 2pc to 3pc annual growth.
It kept interest rates too low for too long, allowing zombie companies to stay afloat when they should have gone under years ago.
It printed far too much money after the financial crisis and later during the pandemic, enabling successive Chancellors to spend too much money on public services without a commensurate rise in output, and leaving us with a bloated welfare system.
[ad_2]
Source link