ECONOMIC experts have warned that the country could be in for a “sharp dose of austerity” after announcing they had found a £4 billion hole in the Chancellor’s spending plans.
More than two weeks after Rishi Sunak laid out his Budget, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has argued that his cutback plans for public spending could mean a return to the purse-string tightening of the David Cameron era.
The economic think tank said that the Home Office, HM Revenue and Customs and the Crown Prosecution Service could all bear the brunt of a 3% real-terms spending cut.
In a statement, the IFS said: “Buried in the Treasury’s Budget document, and entirely unmentioned in the Chancellor’s speech to the House of Commons, was a £4 billion a year cut to planned public service spending from 2022−23.
“This came on top of the £10 to £13 billion cut from those plans in November.”
The IFS said that once pre-agreed cash settlements with the Ministry of Defence, NHS and schools in England had been taken into account, along with the Barnett formula used to determine spending allocations to the devolved administrations, it meant “unprotected” departments could have to scale back spending plans by 8% compared with what they had in mind pre-pandemic.
But researchers said that size of scale back was likely to be “simply unrealistic” and that borrowing or taxes “will be higher than planned” to fund the departments.
“If they are adhered to then many public services are due a second, sharp dose of austerity,” the IFS added.
READ MORE: UK Budget: Kate Forbes welcomes Covid support but 'clouds of austerity are on the horizon'
Ben Zaranko, research economist at the IFS, said: “For departments not fortunate enough to be protected by a pre-existing agreement with the Treasury, the Chancellor’s spending plans are even tighter than they first appeared.
“Spending on those unprotected services in 2022−23 is set to be 3% lower than a year earlier, and 8% lower than what was planned prior to Covid-19.
“This poses clear and obvious challenges, not least because of the new pressures created by the pandemic.
“Plans can change, but as things stand, for many public services, the first half of the 2020s could feel like the austerity of the 2010s.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here