Middle East: Economic Response
Debate between Lord Hintze and Lord Livermore(1 week, 4 days ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Livermore (Lab)
The deal to introduce the first of its kind has been signed with Rolls-Royce, and it is going to be located in north Wales. I think this is incredibly exciting technology and we want to see more of it. We want to see more private sector investment in this technology and in advanced nuclear reactors. We absolutely want to see far more investment in nuclear in this country. As I say, we have signed deals for small modular reactors, and we want to see more private and public sector investment in them.
Lord Hintze (Con)
My Lords, we do indeed have a great country, as the noble Lord said, and we should not be talking it down. But, that said, we should be having proper policy conversations. GDP growth by itself gets us nowhere. If we want to know about prosperity and real value for our citizens, we need to look at GDP growth per capita. I have raised this question a number of times and it has not been answered, which is disappointing to me. Why is this being ignored when all we want to do is make a political point?
The other point of which I want the House to be aware is about transfer payments, whether to farmers, businesses or whomever. As I am sure the noble Lord knows, they have zero value to GDP if they are true transfer payments. Transfer payments, whether to welfare or to whomever else, are a way to poverty.
World Economic Outlook: UK Growth and Inflation
Debate between Lord Hintze and Lord Livermore(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Livermore (Lab)
No, I do not think she is, because the spring forecast showed precisely that: that Britain is well placed to weather this conflict. Inflation was at 3% and it was set to fall to target; borrowing was set to fall more over this Parliament than in any other G7 economy; GDP per capita was forecast to rise by 5.6% over this Parliament, compared with a fall of 0.2% in the previous Parliament; and we had increased headroom to over £23 billion. As I say, all these things mean we are well placed to weather this conflict. On the actual outturn data, last week’s figures show that the economy grew faster than expected in the three months to February, growth for the three months to January was upgraded, and yesterday’s labour market figures for February showed unemployment coming down and real wages continuing to rise.
Lord Hintze (Con)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the only genuine way to look at the prosperity of our citizens in this country is GDP per capita? Does he also agree that one of the big detractors of growth in GDP per capita is the growing and significant welfare spend? If not, why not?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I am very happy to agree with the noble Lord on the first part of his question: as I have said already, GDP per capita at the time of the spring forecast was forecast to rise by 5.6% over this Parliament. That compares with a fall of 0.2% in the previous Parliament—the worst Parliament on record for living standards. On welfare spending, as he knows, the previous Government increased welfare spending by £88 billion.
Forthcoming Fiscal Changes
Debate between Lord Hintze and Lord Livermore(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Livermore (Lab)
Why do we not just compare their records? Where the previous Government delivered the slowest projected growth in the G7, growth in the first half of this year was the fastest in the G7. Where they presided over the worst Parliament ever for living standards, living standards have increased by 2.1% since the election. Where they oversaw the worst pay growth in a century, real wages grew more in the first 10 months of this Government than in the first 10 years of the previous Government. Where they continually cut capital spending and deterred investment, we are investing for the long term, with £120 billion extra over the next five years. We will continue to rebuild the economy after 14 years of failure from the party opposite.
Economic Growth
Debate between Lord Hintze and Lord Livermore(8 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hintze (Con)
My Lords, what analysis has been done between tax rates and the growth rate? Ignoring that ignores the effects of the Scully curve and crowding out in the economy.
Lord Livermore (Lab)
The points the noble Lord makes are perfectly fair. Obviously, the Chancellor has to balance at any fiscal event the importance of fiscal responsibility and sustainability and the need to grow the economy. She will do so in the forthcoming Budget in the way that she always does.
Tax on Imports under £135
Debate between Lord Hintze and Lord Livermore(10 months, 4 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Livermore (Lab)
I think that is a fair definition of that phrase, yes.
Lord Hintze (Con)
My Lords, I have a question to the Minister: why are we always talking about taxation and not being more efficient with our spending?
Lord Livermore (Lab)
We have just completed a zero-based review of the whole of government spending. If the noble Lord has areas of spending that he would like to cut, I am very happy to hear them.