Bear in mind “securonomics”? It was the buzzword Rachel Reeves gave to her financial philosophy again earlier than the election.
The concept was that within the late 2020s, the outdated concepts about the way in which we run the economic system would or ought to give option to a brand new mannequin.
For a very long time, we ignored the place one thing was made and by whom and simply ordered it in from the most affordable supply. For a very long time, we ignored the safety penalties of the place we acquired our vitality from. The upshot of those assumptions was that over time, we allowed our manufacturing base to turn into hollowed out, unable to compete with low-cost imports from China. We allowed our vitality system to turn into ever extra depending on low-cost Russian fuel.
Cash weblog: Grocery store places shopping for restrict on new Lindt model of viral chocolate
The entire level of securonomics was that it issues the place one thing is made and who owns it. And never simply that – that revitalising manufacturing and vitality may assist revitalise “left-behind” corners of the economic system, locations just like the Midlands and the North East.
Again when she got here up with the coinage, Joe Biden was in energy and was pumping billions of {dollars} into the US economic system by way of the Inflation Discount Act – a scheme designed to encourage inexperienced tech funding. So securonomics regarded just a little just like the British model of Bidenomics.
That is the important thing level: the “security” a part of “securonomics” was principally about vitality safety and provide chain safety moderately than about defence.
However when Rachel Reeves grew to become chancellor, it regarded for a interval as if securonomics was useless on arrival. Most manifestly, Labour dramatically trimmed again the ambition and scale of its inexperienced funding plans.
However roll on a yr or so, and everyone knows what occurred subsequent.
A brand new period
The Democrats misplaced, Donald Trump received, got here into workplace and swiftly triggered a series response that panicked everybody in Europe into investing extra in defence. Right now, a lot of the main focus amongst buyers shouldn’t be on web zero however on defence.
All of which is to say, securonomics could be about to resurface, however in a markedly totally different guise. Within the spring assertion, I anticipate the chancellor to deliver again this buzzword, however this time, the emphasis is not going to be on inexperienced tech however on one thing else: the defence sector.
Count on to listen to about weapons
This time round, the chancellor will say securonomics 2.0, which is to say authorities funding within the defence sector may also deliver an financial windfall, as outdated naval ports like Plymouth and Portsmouth see regeneration. This time, the main focus is not going to be on photo voltaic and wind however on submarines and weapons.
Whether or not this rendition of securonomics is any extra profitable than the final stays to be seen. For the chancellor hardly has an infinite amount of cash left to speculate. Whereas this week’s occasion is billed as a mere forecast replace, the fact, if you take a step again, is extra critical.
The chancellor should acknowledge that, with out remedial motion, she would have damaged her fiscal guidelines. She should affirm important adjustments to coverage to rebuild the “headroom” towards these guidelines. These will cease wanting tax rises. As an alternative, the spending envelope in future years will likely be trimmed (assume 1.1% or so spending will increase moderately than 1.3% or 1.4%). These welfare reforms introduced final week will usher in a bit of additional money. And due to an accounting quirk, the choice (introduced a couple of weeks in the past) to shift growth spending into defence may also give her a bit more room towards her guidelines.
The austerity query
However even these adjustments will increase additional awkward questions: is that this or is that this not austerity? Definitely, for some departments, that spending lower will contain additional important sacrifices. Are these advantages beneficial properties actually achievable, and at what value? And, most ominously, what if the chancellor has to come back again to parliament in one other six months and admit she’s damaged her guidelines yet again?
The return of securonomics could be the theme she desires to concentrate on within the coming months – however that, too, is dependent upon having cash to speculate – and the UK’s fiscal place appears as tight as ever.
