X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Coffee House

George Osborne is the king of ‘black holes’. So why does he attack Labour?

22 September 2013

12:03 AM

22 September 2013

12:03 AM

Labour plans have a £27 billion black hole,’ says the Sunday Times, quoting  analysis from George Osborne’s Treasury.  If true, that’s BUtoyjACQAEaN82.jpg-largethe first piece of good economic news we’ll have heard from Labour. Osborne’s black holes have been way, way bigger – well over £100 billion so far. In his excellent new book about journalese, Robert Hutton offers this definition of black hole:

‘A point in space so dense it creates a gravitational field so strong that not even light can escape. Or, in newspapers, a gap. Especially in finance, where it typically refers to any funding shortfall over £1 million.’

Parties love casting a slide rule over each other’s policies, declaring that they don’t add up and use phrases like ‘black hole’. But that was back in the days of balanced budgets.  George Osborne is not so keen on them now. He has torn up his plan to abolish the deficit, and offers no date by which he’d balance the books. His published plans run to 2017/18 and even then, he proposes a deficit – sorry, a black hole, of £43 billion. So if Labour could reduce it to £27 billion, it’d be a marked improvement.

Yes, Osborne inherited black holes. But crucially, in office, he decided to make them bigger. The below graph shows what he has done:-

[Alt-Text]


Screen Shot 2013-09-22 at 11.06.57

The Conservatives are in a rather weak position, given that the government is still borrowing like drunken Keynesians –  each day creating black holes big enough to swallow a Klingon army. It’s tempting to try this attack line anyway, though,  because so few people actually realise what Osborne is doing. Polls show that between 6 per cent and 12 per cent of us realise that he is pushing up the national debt. Perhaps this is because ministers (and the Chancellor himself) keep telling us how they are ‘paying down’ or ‘dealing with’ the debt. Here’s the Prime Minister, earlier this year:

UK debt

The Conservatives have become intensely relaxed about multi-billion pound black holes, while taking sternly about how dangerous they are. What I suspect this dossier means is that the black hole would be even darker under Labour, but the Tories want to give the impression that there would be no such instability with them. If only this were so. The choice in 2015 will be a depressing one: would you like your black hole red, blue or yellow?

The Tory attack on Labour today is on the premise that such black holes are destabilising. ‘It’s exactly the kind of something-for-nothing economics that got us into the mess in the first place,’ says Sajid Javid, the estimable Treasury minister. He’s quite right. But I’d prefer that Treasury officials spent more time worrying about their black hole, and less time worrying about Labour’s.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close