-
I still can't believe this exchange - The chief sec to treasury is failing to understand how to read a graph with 5 points on it. This graph outlines the complete basis of their "fiscal rules". She seems to think that the 5th dot is lower than the 1st dot, when it is actually only lower than the 4th dot. Her failure to understand this meant that the interviewer was unable to actually ask his question.
This would be bad enough were it not for the fact the OBR has publicly asked Sunak to ensure he accurately reflects what the graph shows in his public statements - i.e. that debt is not falling, but is predicted to fall at some future point in the future. How can the Chief Sec to the Treasury still then not understand this and misunderstand the question!
Scrabble-
(For the purposes of this discussion let's just take it as read that it's necessary and/or good to reduce debt). The target of course is deliberately stupid - it's always at the end of a 5 year rolling period - so you never need to reduce debt at all. The only restriction it gives is that you have to make things add up in the future, but when they actually come closer you can ignore it. This is particularly good for a chancellor/PM who get praised for cancelling tax rises that they were never actually intending to implement. Fuel duty escalator for example they leave in the plans in theory, to help it add up, then suspend it every year.
It is unforgivably stupid that the CST - a role that in terms of practical impact on policy in the country is second to probably nobody but the chancellor -doesn't even understand their own deliberate trick on this.
-
Easily done
lemonade
Light_EDDed
You’d wish it was parody.