Government Surplus and Labour

bank failures: Moreover, no government surplus, however large, could have funded the £300bn exposure the UK government was forced to take on to keep the banks open, nor the fact that when, as a direct result of the bank failures, GDP fell 6% in 2009-10 – one of the largest and fastest falls in history – and tax take fell 18%. This was what caused the deficit, not prodigal spending on health, education and welfare, nor Labour failure to run a surplus, according to The Guardian. Patrick Renshaw Sheffield • Matthew d’Ancona is of course correct about George Osborne coup in converting Labour to the false god of harsh fiscal conservatism. He quotes David Cameron asserting in 2010 that Labour had maxed out its credit card and Chuka Umunna rueful question: If government can’t run a surplus in the 15th year of economic expansion, when can it run one The fact is that debt-to-GDP ratio fell from 42.5% in 1996-97, the year Labour took power, to 35.9% in 2006-07, the year before the banks failed. What is surprising is the utter lack of a robust counter-narrative, especially when there is an almost blindingly obvious response to the charge of New Labour economic mismanagement and excessive borrowing: just ask the bond markets. A simple look at the interest rates of UK government 10-year gilts over the New Labour period should therefore be enough to win the argument. Was the bond market closed to New Labour If not, then clearly the market gods sanctified New Labour economic credentials. (news.financializer.com). As reported in the news.