What Portugal means for the UK
Matthew Hancock MP 5:28pm
Last night, Portugal's parliament voted to reject its latest measures to deal with its
deficit. It was the fourth time that the Portuguese parliament had been asked for more taxes and for more spending cuts. The result has been a further loss of confidence in Portugal’s ability
to pay its debts. Market interest rates have risen to over 8 percent. European leaders are meeting this weekend to work out a path forward. The lessons for us here in the UK are starkly clear.
First, it is better to set out all the difficult decisions needed to deal with the debt crisis, even if these take place over a number of years, rather than continually going back to ask for more. That the Budget was neutral overall shows that a clear plan is being followed here.
Second, to budge from the course of living within our means would lead to sharply higher interest rates. Our deficit is more than double Portugal's; yet our market interest rates are around 3.5 percent, not 8 percent.
If our plan was abandoned, and interest rates increased to 8 percent, it would be a catastrophe for Britain's homeowners and businesses. It would undoubtedly ruin the recovery.
What's more, the OBR shows that the direct costs to the taxpayer of higher interest rates are £5.3bn a year by 2015 for every 1 percent rise in rates. If rates rose to 8 percent here, that would cost £24bn.
So the question for those without a plan to deal with the deficit is this: what would you do to pay the £24bn extra that we would have to pay in interest?
This shows that to abandon the plan to deal with the deficit would be a huge risk. It would be to gamble the nation's finances on the bond markets. We should not play chicken with the bond markets. The safest option for the future of our economy is to stick with the plan – the plan that will rebalance the economy, restore sustainable growth, and rebuild the legacy we will leave to our children.
Matthew Hancock is the Conservative MP for Suffolk West



Previous






normanc
March 24th, 2011 5:48pm Report this commentLay off the Commons subsidised bar before writing up articles. This is complete nonsense. What has happened to the rate we pay for our borrowing since last May, when markets still had hope that the government would tackle the deficit? And they'll continue in that direction.
Chancellor announced increased spending of:
2011-12 increase of £10.6 billion
2012-13 increase of £9.2 billion
2013-14 increase of £8.1 billion
2014-15 increase of £6.1 billion
(source johnredwood.com)
Borrowing for this Parliament will be somewhere near 500bn by the time we have a giveaway budget or two in 2014/15 (ironically the years when the actual cuts are planned to start). Optimistically there are cuts of around 0.6% planned but I doubt we'll acheive even that paltry level. Taxation planned to rise by a staggering 170bn or so over this Parliament (that's where the real deficit reduction is coming from) a lot of this based on optimstic growth figures.
I'd stake my mortgage that we'll still be borrowing 50bn+ come 2015 and interest rates on our borrowing increasing over course of this Parliament.
You can make the case that it'd be worse under labour (and I'd agree) but to suggest this government is leaving anything but a complete fical nightmare for future generations to sort out is fatuous.
Boudicca
March 24th, 2011 5:55pm Report this commentJust think how much more we could reduce our deficit by, and put towards paying off our debt, if we weren't subsidising the Eurozone PIIGS or paying £48million a day into the EU.
Are we supposed to be grateful to the Coalition? I can't for the life of me see why.
Norman Dee
March 24th, 2011 6:10pm Report this commentand it's only just starting Boudica, Europe forced Ireland and Greece to take the bailouts, they are now forcing Portugal, and again we will contribute. Next it's Spain then Italy, wait till that particular merde hits the fan, the first three combined will be less than Spain, and Italy more again.
Simon Stephenson.
March 24th, 2011 6:15pm Report this commentHere's a trio of posers for you Mr Hancock.
Do you think that the 8% Portuguese rate is in any way influenced by that country having a far worse external debt position than, say, the UKs? And could it in any way also be possible that the rate is pushed up by the fact that Portugal is in the Eurozone, and therefore less easily able to rectify its economic imbalances than countries outside the Eurozone - countries like, say, the UK? Moreover, could it be possible that the 8% reflects a genuine fear that a distinctly possible resolution of the Euro crisis will involve partial write-offs of the debts of the troubled Southern European nations - write-offs that for AAA rated countries like, say, the UK, clearly aren't on the bond market's radar screen?
If you agree that these three factors may at least partially explain the divergence between the UKs 3.5% and Portugal's 8%, can you then explain why you have suggested that we too should expect 8% interest rates if we fail to follow exactly the deficit-reduction path set out by the current government?
What do you think the readers of this blog are? Halfwits?
Ken Bishop
March 24th, 2011 6:29pm Report this commentTwo simple ways to save lots of money: (1) stop invading other people's countries, (2) stop bombing other people's countries.
Rhoda Klapp
March 24th, 2011 6:30pm Report this comment" A clear plan is being followed here "
And would it involve a good deal of nocturnal whistling?
Verity
March 24th, 2011 6:44pm Report this commentWhat Portugal means for the UK?
It gives George Osborne someone to cuddle?
In2minds
March 24th, 2011 7:24pm Report this commentI wonder if Ken Clarke is still keen to join the euro, and should we be told if he is?
denis cooper
March 24th, 2011 7:30pm Report this commentMr Hancock is one of the 310 MPs who voted yesterday for Cameron to support a treaty change which other EU countries desperately want, but without demanding any significant quid pro quo for our national benefit and especially to protect our long term national interests.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110323/debtext/110323-0004.htm
"23 Mar 2011 : Column 1063
Deferred Division
Section 6 of the european union (amendment) act 2008
That this House takes note of draft European Council decision EUCO 33/10 (to amend Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union with regard to a stability mechanism for Member States whose currency is the euro) and, in accordance with section 6 of the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008, approves Her Majesty's Government's intention to support the adoption of draft European Council decision EUCO 33/10.
The House divided: Ayes 310, Noes 29.
Division No. 236]
AYES
Adams, Nigel ...
... Hancock, Matthew ... "
Commentator
March 24th, 2011 7:35pm Report this commentnormanc, entirely accurate. The Coalition is just New Labour reflagged.
Chris lancashire
March 24th, 2011 9:42pm Report this commentWould all the anti-EU fanatics castigating Osborne just stop and think - really think - about the only realistic alternative government. If anyone is struggling the picture at the top is a clue. Now think hard what they would be doing now - bottowing lots more, spending it on useless make-work schemes and digging this country even deeper in to its debt pit with even less hope of ever getting out.
I'm not keen on a lot of the EU but for heaven's sake stop and think about the feasible alternatives.
Scotty
March 24th, 2011 10:17pm Report this commentIts obvious that the deficit must be controlled - we may not be constrained by being in the euro, but we still have an enormous debt to pay off and those supporting that debt will need to know they will be repaid - if the new labour or the old labour gang were in power we would end up with increased debt, because spending our taxes is all that labour of any age can do.
Just think what situation we would be in if balls was making decisions - he would be stealth taxing us to total bankruptcy.
TrevorsDen
March 24th, 2011 10:41pm Report this commentMr Lancashire - its part of your charm that you can suppose a reality where these anti EU fanatics can actually think.
I like probably you can do without the EU, but we live in the real world.
We have better interest rates because we are getting our economy under control. Portugal is in a mess because its MPs have umpteen times voted NOT to get their economy under control.
I think we can ignore the reliability of people who say cuts are only going to start in 2014/15.
My local authority is certainly not working on that premise.
TomTom
March 25th, 2011 8:59am Report this commentAnother Bank Bale Out disguised as rescuing a sovereign state. It is time Deutsche Bank took a full haircut and lost its shirt. We are not going to impoverish citizens to fund bank profits and to rescue them from stupid decisions. Britain did not join the Euro and did not borrow on the basis of a German Fairy Godmother honouring our gambling debts. Time for the Banks to see their Bonuses wiped out and not just their Shareholders
denis cooper
March 25th, 2011 9:09am Report this commentTrevorsden -
So as a thinking person, do you believe that it is our national interest for our government to sign us up to a "Save the Euro" campaign?
I remember when Hague was more interested in "Save the Pound".
Under present treaty arrangements the two are incompatible in the long term, because THE EUROZONE CAN ONLY GROW.
There should be a treaty mechanism for a country which has joined the euro to make an orderly withdrawal, but there isn't.
There should NOT be a treaty obligation on all EU countries to eventually join the euro, but apart from the UK and Denmark there is that legal obligation and it is automatically imposed on all new member states.
Cameron had it in his power to insist on those two treaty changes to cut the eurozone down to size and limit the long term threat it would pose to our national interests, and to demand other concessions such as an end to the EU Parliament sitting in more than one place and permanent exemption from the WTD, as the quid pro quo for the treaty change wanted by Germany and France in particular.
Instead he is prepared to give them whatever they want and demand nothing in return, and Matthew Hancock and 309 other MPs, including all the Tory MPs bar about 20, have just voted in favour of that policy of appeasement.
MaxSceptic
March 25th, 2011 9:36am Report this commentEU Referendum Now!
michael
March 25th, 2011 10:26am Report this commentIts not what 'Portugal means to the UK'.
Rather what the UK means to Portugal.
-Our cash to maintain their over extended state, ie no tuition fees in their public universities.
RCE
March 25th, 2011 10:42am Report this commentThe argument that it would be worse under Labour is one of the stupidest I've ever heard. The fact that there are even bigger criminals around doesn't mean the lesser ones get off the hook!
Ian Walker
March 25th, 2011 12:20pm Report this commentMaxSceptic: make sure you vote in favour of AV in May, then the next election becomes a de facto referendum on EU membership.
Rhoda Klapp
March 25th, 2011 12:27pm Report this commentWould Mr Hancock like to tell us why he voted as he did, and what his take on the EU is?
Or is this merely a pulpit, not a discussion?
Chris lancashire
March 25th, 2011 2:17pm Report this commentRCE: Not stupid, realistic.
stabledoor
March 25th, 2011 2:19pm Report this commentIt's all very well going on about Portugal, but what about the proposed closure of the municiapl tip in Newmarket eh? or are you above that sort of thing? and why did you vote for that EU proposal?
john miller
March 25th, 2011 6:24pm Report this commentThis article would be vastly improved by eliminating the text but retaining the headline and the picture.
The 2EdsWorseThanOne would be re-lected in perpetuity in sunnier climes.
Back to top