This from AndyC's PM.
Posted via this as I can't create a new post on the blog from my work account (I can comment but not post - the joys of being locked into IE6!)
Current Government spending breakdown in detail is at http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/pesa_2011_chapter1.pdf
The most useful tables (in my opinion) are the ones comparing expenditure in real terms (1.4 Resource Budgets, 1.7 Capital Budgets).
We should all have a look and suggest changes to the budgets. Bear in mind that beyond the levels in my Tax-and-benefits post (which includes £5bn spend on house building), the closing of tax loopholes will bring in an extra £11.8bn, which I propose spending rather than saving.
Note that AME is very difficult to control; however, I reckon that a withdrawal from Afghanistan could free up £2bn per year from the Defence AME budget (leaving Defence RDEL and CDEL unchanged)
My personal take has capital DEL increasing from 39.2bn in 2013-14 (nominal expenditure in table 1.6) to £61.2 bn as a capital stimulus (mainly on housing (£8.8bn), transport (more than doubling current transport CDEL, focussed on road building/dualling: £7.7bn), Energy & Climate change £3.3bn (again, more than doubled, focussed on energy generation - details later), and BIS +£3.3bn (from 0.75bn) - assuming that BIS will be where the space program is lodged ...
To pay for this, I'm cashing in all of the tax avoidance savings, £2bn from withdrawing from Afghanistan and reducing the International Development CDEL from £1.95bn to £0.9bn - back to 2008/9 levels (still a slight increase in real terms from 2007/8, before the Crash)
RDEL I'm (in my proposal) keeping level but shifting cash from the Cabinet Office (0.5bn) and Int Dev again (3.5bn; again back to 2007/8 levels) to BIS (£1bn - towards a reduction in student fees and a restoration of some research funding cuts), Energy and Climate Change (£1bn - towards restoring subsidies for solar panels on housing) and Education (£2bn, but I'm not sure what to spend it on ...)
All suggestions more than welcome. That's just my stab at prioritisation.
I think we find ourselves in a bit of a sticky situation here, with a general desire to reduce the size of government but LOOK AT ALL THIS MONEY AND THE COOL THINGS WE COULD SPEND IT ON.
ReplyDeleteAnd, is it just me, or have we increased our tax take by over £100bn (and spent it on GMI)?
Personally there are a few things that could use greater funding:
-Massive boost to R&D as well as massive reform to the way that the government spends its research money - this is tied in with prospective patent reform (more on this later)
-Money for education to muck around with some pilot schemes to test some ideas about schools.
-Definitely agree with more road-building.
As far as energy goes, I think we need - rather than large-scale government investment - better incentives for companies to invest in shale gas, nuclear and renewable energy sources (i.e. not coal). That might mean a carbon tax, it might mean subsidies, it's going to mean deregulation. I'm not sure the state should be running around building power plants though.
As for where to squeeze money from, turn the army upside down and shake them.
On the first point - yeah, I agree that reduction in Government size is generally a good idea and I'd normally be fully signed up to it - but right now, we need stimulus. And if we're going to have to spend money, let's get useful stuff.
ReplyDeleteThe tax-take-to-GMI stuff is, when you get down to it, largely an accountancy thing. Anyone earning over £15k has it as an adjustment on their tax form rather than cash received. Anyone who formerly received Tax Credits yet paid income tax as well gets simplified out.
I'm on board with the R&D bit - not all that £3.3bn should go on space (though as a space geek I'd not complain).
- Education - that's something for the £2bn then :D (I knew someone would have good ideas for it and I see it as a supply-side reform in the long-term)
- Agree on energy. The amount put forward is a pot with which we can form ideas. Bring forth the incentive suggestions - I didn't want to circumscribe the debate excessively - just suggesting an arena of funding levels. I like prizes like the X-Prize if they can be made to fit.
On the army front - you've got a point. I've finally found some better data and the army get the lion's share of RDEL (think of the ratios as going like RN 24%, Army 40%, RAF 21%, Other 15%). A chunk of the army is fixed costs rather than variable costs, but we could probably squeeze £2bn - £3bn further from the Army in the long term - but those funds won't be forthcoming for at least 3 years (you've got to go through redundancy processes and redundancy payoffs).
I don't agree that we should cut the Army any-more, withdrawal from Afghanistan should cover things on that front. That, and all the things that we save by withdrawing should save us a few things.
DeleteWell, I'm personally amenable to maintaining the Defence Budget (less the Afghanistan operations) as the savings would come rather late in the Parliament - though I'd strongly recommend a redistribution away from the Army towards the Navy.
ReplyDeleteThis is an area where I think we should seek a consensus on funding.
We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. I still think the idea of public-sponsorship of Regiments, Squadrons and Warships will help :) . But alot of the Navy's ''main fleet'' (the frigates, etc) is in need of replacing.
ReplyDelete