good morning. Britain must be ready to fight war – ultimately. That’s a somewhat vague message from the government. And the public is just as vague. Some thoughts about the following:
The three are magic numbers
The big problem with the government is that while multiple Britons believe that defence spending needs to increase, it is that a) not majority public opinion, b) workers’ voters are the least sold in ideas.
Some content could not be loaded. Please check your internet connection or browser settings.
When you ask how they feel about raising taxes to pay it, the majority hate the idea. . .
Some content could not be loaded. Please check your internet connection or browser settings.
. . . And when you ask how they feel elsewhere, if you fund an increase in defense spending, they don’t like the idea.
Some content could not be loaded. Please check your internet connection or browser settings.
Some of this is as simple as “it’s not a good idea to try to run a country based on how people respond to voting questions.” For example, I think UK defence spending should increase. But I don’t particularly want to raise my taxes. (It’s my money and I like being able to spend it!) Also, I don’t want to beat public spending. When I observe my own part of central London, I see that the British state is a bad way, not to mention when I travel outside the capital.
Ultimately, the government of work that day is to choose the path and persuade the rest of us. I think one of the reasons why public opinion is so confused is that people know that they get to a decision based on what people think about the politicians they are claiming. Workers’ debates tend to be so confused and changeable that those who want to be loyal don’t know what position they are loyal to, and those who never support the government don’t know what position they reflexively oppose.
Just yesterday, Kiel Starmer told us that Britain needs to be ready to fight the war. He also said the UK cannot “tax on growth” and refused to ensure that his government accurately reaches 3% of its GDP defence spending target. It’s no wonder that British voters haven’t sent clear signals about what they want when the Prime Minister doesn’t.
Similar confusion has taken hold of the entire government. Labour claims that the taxes are too high, but indirectly increased our national insurance contributions by freezing the income tax band and increasing the tax on the employer’s NIC. At the same time, the government has argued that we have not returned to austerity, but many of its sectors will obtain daily budget settlements that mean that existing services will be shut down. Again, it’s no wonder people are asked by pollers what they think.
Part of the government of work that day is to choose trade-offs and discuss them. The alternatives we live in today – the government has not actually chosen positions – will never work politically. It won’t work under policy conditions as the government is in half-half position as it opposes taxes while raising taxes, lamenting austerity while delivering them, and insisting on recontracting while postponing them to an undefined date.
Try this now
This week I listened to letters to the future, mainly while Kevin wrote my column.
Today’s top stories
Budget Battle | Rachel Reeves is trapped in a spending review showdown with four major Cabinet ministers amid criticism that the Treasury Prime Minister and her “accountants” are setting government policies.
“The cutting edge” | A government survey that stated that the minister demonstrated the technology’s ability to provide productivity improvements across Whitehall, found that civil servants who used artificial intelligence tools for management tasks were released in working hours for two weeks a year.
British Military Future | Reporter details yesterday’s strategic defense review.
Recommended newsletter
Last week – Start every week with a preview of what’s on the agenda. Sign up here
Newswrap – A summary of our business and economics. Sign up here
