Imagine if the British government wrote off its holdings of its own debt

Last week, I considered recent research published by the BIS – Bank of International Settlements pushing the ‘growth friendly austerity’ myth – which was a classic example of how the sense of urgency and crisis is engendered by constructing the narrative in such a restricted manner that real world options are excluded which contradict the mission. If we assume that key features of any system are unable to be activated, then it is easy to speculate that the system will fail. This communication technique abounds in the financial and economic commentariat and leaves listeners and readers with a sense of anxiety and distort the political process. The commentaries that typify this approach all invoke a sense of urgency – ‘act now or else’ – and like to quote large dollar (pound, yen etc) sums because the commentator knows that our eyes glaze over with numbers that are beyond our own experience. Further, when the article parades as an Op Ed, the writer regularly just rehearses some press release or perhaps, less formal statement, that some organisation like the IMF has made. The other part of the scam is that these organisations are elevated into the sphere of sources that are to be believed without question. Two recent examples are the recent articles appearing in the UK Guardian – Burnham’s funding gap: what state are UK finances in for the PM-in-waiting? (published July 3, 2026) – and – Act soon to change ‘unsustainable’ direction of UK debt, OBR warns (published July 7, 2026).

Read more

What the new British government needs to do to get the unions on side with climate action

The recent extreme weather in the northern hemisphere, the twin monster tropical storms in Japan, the impending shutdown of the – Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (Amoc) – among other happenings is telling us that things are changing for the worse. Clearly long-term weather trends are open to interpretation because the available data is sketchy the further one goes back. And, narratives from historians tell us that there have been rather extreme weather events in the past, which have led to many lost lives. The National Museum of Australia has an interesting information page – Heatwaves – which helps us understand the historical experience in Australia. There are other credible sites that deal with global events. However, the serial nature of the recent weather trends and the interlinked changes in the oceanic conditions, the cryosphere, rain and storms, and temperature allows us to counter the arguments that are presented to refute climate change science, which rely on claims that the current period is just part of a recurring cycle. These events are also relevant to the current political machinations in the UK, where Starmer is going (yay!) and the new probably PM is under fire from both business and unions for wanting to do something about climate change. In this post, I discuss what can be done.

Read more

Replacing Starmer/Reeves with another captive of the finance sector will change nothing

Successive governments in the UK – Labour and Tory – have pushed the nation to the brink where there is little capacity left for progressive policy. And I am not referring to Brexit. Rather, the elevation of the financial sector as a primary force in the economy, dating back really to the Callaghan Labour government and then fast tracked by Thatcher and Blair, has resulted in almost every important part of the economy being devoured by the greed machine. This is relevant to the leadership struggle in the UK Labour government, which should see the lamentable Starmer replaced by the (to be assessed) Andy Burnham. The latter would be the first Prime Minister to hail from Lancashire since David Lloyd George (1916-22) although Harold Wilson came from nearby Yorkshire. The problem the new leader will face apart from his own misguided notions about fiscal capacity and the need for ‘strict’ fiscal rules is that the financialisation of the British economy (like most economies in this neoliberal age) is so pervasive that the spheres of resistance to change are everywhere.

Read more

Apparently the UK government is about to do the impossible – run out of sterling

Go back to the headlines in 2010 – – “Countries with debt over 90 percent of GDP enter a danger zone”. The 90 per cent threshold entered the media coverage as a result of a paper released by Harvard economists Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart – Growth in a Time of Debt. That paper talked about “debt intolerance limits” arising from “sharply rising interest rates” – and then “painful fiscal adjustments” and “outright default”. It also talked about the “obvious connection” between inflation and high public debt ratios – which had me laughing at the time because no-one has really shown that to be a robust relationship at all. Everyone started quoting the paper, even though at the time it had obvious flaws. The predictions failed to materialise as did all the previous predictions that economists like them had failed. But the press keeps giving their views a public platform because the lurid predictions attract audiences. It is a pity because lame politicians seem to regard the predictions as being based in fact and change policies for the worse. Anyway, Rogoff is back in town predicting that the British government will run out of sterling and be forced to bring in the IMF to address the fiscal crisis. That is what the headlines say. But if you delve more deeply, his position is a little different and exposes the chicanery of mainstream economics which holds itself out as a consistent body of theory but regularly uses that pretence to bully governments into political shifts that help the elites and damage the rest of us.

Read more

New Green-linked report in Britain avoids the critical issue

I read a new Report this morning – Waste Not – that was published by a new unit in Britain called Verdant, which seems to have links to the England and Wales Green Party. The work is interesting and raises several issues that bear on how government fiscal policy should be assessed. The issues I have with the Report were not canvassed by the author to its detriment. It relates to the impact of government spending and the employment effects of cutting expenditure, regardless of whether we classify that expenditure as ‘waste’ or not.

Read more

A successful degrowth strategy will require a massive redistribution of income and wealth towards the poorest

It is true that all big cities have areas of poverty that is visible from the streets. But I am always a bit shocked when I travel to London, where I am currently working, because the inequality is very obvious. As I work more on the degrowth, decolonisation project that I am currently involved in, one thing becomes paramount. An overwhelming proportion of the total fossil fuel energy usage is due to the consumption of the wealthiest households. And to dramatically reduce our ecological footprint will require dramatically reducing the capacity of the top end of the income and wealth distributions to consume energy. However, all the trends are moving against that requirement. Here are some notes on that topic.

Read more

Those who invoke the ‘Truss Moment’ should look at what is happening in Japan

In the annals of ruses used to provoke fear in the voting public about government deficits, central bank currency issuance, and fiscal activism, the experience of Germany in the 1920s was a long-standing favourite, that could be wheeled out on demand and have immediate effect. Wheelbarrows full of money being pushed to the local bakery to buy the daily bread, etc. It was a very effective vehicle for advancing the interests of the ruling class because it created a political brake on government action to reduce poverty and maintain full employment. More recently, Zimbabwe became the vehicle. It was equally effective even though it, like the Weimar ruse, was largely based on fiction. Even more recently, we have a new ‘ruse on the block’, the so-called ‘Truss Moment’, which is particularly effective in the UK. The current Labour government is petrified to do anything that might resemble a Labour government because they have a deep-seated paranoid ideation that the ‘City’ is out to get them, and the ‘Truss Moment’ is used as the summary event that apparently justify that delusion. They might have looked to the East, to Japan, to see why the ‘Truss Moment’ was about something quite different to the popular narrative that accompanies the mention of the ill-fated few months in British politics.

Read more

British Labour’s obsession with fiscal rules is untenable and ignores the reality of the situation

I have been a consistent critic of the way in which the British Labour Party, both in opposition and in government, is obsessed with rigid fiscal rules, thinking it is the only way that it can demonstrate fiscal credibility (whatever that is in their minds). The result is that they get cornered into situations that either lead them to make poor decisions which lose them votes and give the likes of Nigel Farage more fuel for his crusade or they are forced to admit they cannot achieve the (unachievable) fiscal rules. Either way it is a clusterf*)@. In the last week or so, we have witnessed the ludicrous situation of the British Office of Budget Responsibility failing to protect its own file systems and leaking information before the Chancellor presented her official fiscal statement. The leaked information just happened to contradict the messaging of the Chancellor which was a bit inconvenient. But the important issue that all this raises is not whether OBR can run a secure WordPress site (evidently it cannot), but that the information it generates is so inaccurate and systematically biased that it cannot realistically be used as the basis for assessing fiscal policy. Which means that the obsession with the fiscal rules leads to policy changes that damage things that matter – such as employment and services – but those policy changes are based on information (OBR forecasts) that subsequent revelations tell us would not justify those policy shifts. As I said – clusterf8x@.

Read more

What does it mean for a nation to become bankrupt?

The reason I ask that question is because I read in the UK Guardian article yesterday (published August 11, 2025) – As dark financial clouds gather, Labour has to heed its past: when it chooses austerity, it loses elections – that “Britain is in danger of going bankrupt. It may happen slowly or quickly, but since Labour took office this possibility has increasingly been promoted and discussed in the press, by opposition parties and in the City of London”. And when the author of that article poses his own question: “What exact form will this bankruptcy take?” – he offers the rather tepid response that it will happen because the government is “spending too much, generally on people who have little”, which offers nothing by way of clarification or definitiveness. So it is useful to interrogate the notion of a nation going broke. Can it happen? Can Britain become insolvent?

Read more

The British government’s obsession with the fiscal rules is driving the economy towards recession

The UK economy is heading into a malaise. The latest news – UK construction activity in July falls at steepest rate since Covid (August 6, 2025) – and – UK services sector has biggest fall in orders for nearly three years (August 5, 2025) – confirms that there is a slowdown underway. That was prefaced by rising unemployment and falling overall GDP growth in previous data releases. However, when we examine statements coming from the Labour government, the Prime Minister is hinting that there might be tax rises in the Autumn Statement because a neoliberal oriented ‘think tank’ has told it that there is a £40 billion gap in the fiscal outcomes, which will breach the self-imposed limits specified in their fiscal rules. So the Government is contemplating more austerity and contractionary policy at a time when private spending is subdued and the economy is going backwards. It just demonstrates how the obsession with these fiscal rules grossly distorts fiscal decision making and focuses government eyes on all the wrong things. I am still amazed when I think how stupid we all have become for thinking that any of the stuff is acceptable.

Read more
Back To Top