74 years on - and Britain is still struggling to balance the books
But as a financial journalist who has reported on Budgets since the mid-1970s, the news was depressingly familiar. It dated to the final days of the post-War Government. The occupant of No 11 seeking to balance the nation's books was Hugh Gaitskell. Hailing from the moderate wing of Labour, he was the Rachel Reeves of his time.
Tax and spend were the order of the day, but the welfare state was still in its infancy and handouts on today's scale were a dream.
Dominating the Budget was defence of the realm. On the eve of the Korean War, Britain was spending 8.5 per cent of national output on the military. That was sharply down on the peak during the Second World War.
It puts in perspective Keir Starmer's pledge to devote 2.5 per cent of gross domestic product to defence by 2027 and the undertaking at the recent Nato summit to eventually raise this to 5 per cent of GDP.
In contrast the big consumers of Government resources in 2025-26 are welfare, the NHS and education. Spending on these was minuscule, compared with arms, in 1951-52.
A key similarity with today is that the UK of 74 years ago was up to its neck in borrowing, debt and interest payments. Defeating Hitler was the only goal that mattered for Winston Churchill's Cabinet and in 1951 the ratio of debt-to-GDP stood at a huge 200 per cent.
Britain has suffered three successive shocks to the public finances this century. The global financial crisis, Covid and soaring energy bills after Russia's invasion of Ukraine have sent the national debt soaring to 100 per cent of annual output. But remarkably that is half the level of 1951.
The cost of servicing all that debt – including war loans from the US, savings certificates and Government bonds – was also far higher then. The annual interest bill was £215 billion in today's money – almost twice the £126 billion cost of servicing the national debt today.
Those urging Reeves to loosen her fiscal straitjacket may find solace in the 1951 deal. Britain was deep in debt but survived.
Taxation then was a simpler affair. Dominated, as it is today, by income tax, it was boosted by a surtax on the wealthy.
National Insurance, now worth £199 billion a year to the exchequer, was near invisible.
The biggest change to the tax system came after Britain joined the EU in 1973. It brought the Revenue the gift of VAT, which this year is set to raise £214 billion, making it the second biggest revenue-raiser after income tax. In 1951, when consumer spending power was modest, purchase tax raised a miserable £310 million or £3.8 billion today.
One ever-present element of Budgets is alcohol duty. A few pennies off a pint is still seen by No 11 as a way of soothing the troubles of working people.
As long as they can find a pub that's still open after the Chancellor's latest tax raid.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Gun-toting migrant who called for the 'death of all Jews' is back behind bars after breaching licence conditions
A 'Hamas-supporting' illegal Channel migrant who was released early from jail is back behind bars after breaching his licence conditions, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. Palestinian Abu Wadee was sent back to prison within days of his release under Labour's scheme to ease pressure on the overcrowded prison estate. The 33-year-old was initially jailed for nine months at Canterbury Crown Court in May after he was convicted over his illegal arrival in the UK on a dinghy, which he had live-streamed on TikTok. He admitted one count of attempting to enter the UK without leave or valid entry clearance when he arrived on the crowded inflatable on March 6. Wadee was arrested by immigration enforcement officers at an asylum hotel in Manchester, three days after he arrived in the UK, after the MoS uncovered a stream of online anti-Semitic vitriol in which he called for the 'death to all Jews'. Wadee, also known as Mosab Abdulkarim Al-Gassas, is believed to be from the city of Khan Yunis in Gaza. Images on social media show him taking part in running battles with the Israel Defence Forces. He was released from prison in June after serving around three months, including time spent in custody awaiting his plea hearing. Sources confirmed Wadee was recalled to prison early last month for breaching his licence conditions. He will now serve the remainder of his nine-month sentence behind bars. It is not known what prompted his recall to jail. A 12-month jail term usually triggers automatic removal from the UK, so a court will have to decide whether to deport Wadee. But he would likely have to be sent to one of the European countries he previously passed through on his journey to the UK, rather than his homeland due to the conflict with Israel making it a warzone. He has lodged an asylum application in the UK, having previously made similar applications in Greece, Belgium and Germany before crossing the Channel. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'This shameful episode lays bare a double Labour failure. 'Firstly, their failure to control our borders is allowing people like this hateful extremist into our country. 'And then Labour's early release scheme is allowing dangerous criminals to roam our streets and put the public at risk.' Wadee is just one of 25,000 migrants to have arrived in the UK in small boats so far this year.
The Sun
12 minutes ago
- The Sun
Major UK high street bank quits UN-backed net zero alliance as it says body ‘not fit for purpose'
A MAJOR high street bank has become the latest British lender to quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the bank said on Friday. Barclays argued that the departure of several global lenders has left it no longer fit to support the bank's green transition. Barclays' decision to quit the foremost banking alliance focused on tackling climate change follows on from HSBC and several major US banks. It also raises questions about the ability of the group to influence change in the sector going forward. The bank said in a statement on its website: "After consideration, we have decided to withdraw from the Net Zero Banking Alliance." It added that its commitment to be net zero by 2050 remained unchanged and that it still saw a commercial opportunity for itself and its clients in the energy transition. Earlier this week Barclays published the first update on its sustainability strategy in several years. It said the bank made £500 million in revenue from sustainable and low-carbon transition finance in 2024. Jeanne Martin, co-director of corporate engagement at responsible investment NGO ShareAction called the decision to leave the Net Zero Banking Alliance "incredibly disappointing and a step in the wrong direction at a time when the dangers of climate change are rapidly mounting." Barclays said the alliance was no longer fit for its purpose: "With the departure of most of the global banks, the organisation no longer has the membership to support our transition." The Net Zero Banking Alliance, a global initiative launched by the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative, lists more than 100 members on its website - including leading international financial institutions. A spokesperson for the alliance said it remains focused on "supporting its members to lead on climate by addressing the barriers preventing their clients from investing in the net-zero transition." It comes after it was announced that Barclays is slashing interest rates on its popular Rainy Day for the third time in less than seven months. From August 4, the interest rate for balances up to £5,000 will fall from 4.61% to 4.36%. The Rainy Day Saver account, which offers easy access to funds, has been a favourite among Barclays ' 20 million customers. It is designed for balances up to £5,000, with savers earning the higher rate on the first £5,000 – currently 4.61%. Savings above this threshold earn just 1% interest, but customers benefit from instant access to their money at any time. At the current rate, holding £5,000 in the account would earn you £230.50 in interest over 12 months. However, when the rate drops to 4.36%, this will fall to £218 - a loss of £12.50 per year. Once boasting a competitive 5.12% interest rate earlier this year, Barclays has steadily chipped away at its appeal. In February, the rate dropped to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. In February, the bank reduced the rate to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. Now, just months later, rates are set to drop again, leaving savers questioning whether to stick with the account or explore better options elsewhere. How Barclay Card Changes Could Affect You ANALYSIS by Consumer Reporter, James Flanders: Barclaycard's change to its credit card repayment structure sounds great if you don't dig into the details. After all, Barclaycard says it's "making the changes to give you greater flexibility each month". In practice, it means that if you can't afford to pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period, you can repay much less under the minimum repayment option than you have done previously. If you only pay the minimum amounts on occasion, this is super useful. But if you rely on this type of repayment plan in the long term, it could will cost you hundreds of pounds extra in interest. It could also negatively affect your credit file as it'll take you much longer to clear your debt. More interest will be applied to your outstanding balance, too, as less is paid down each month. For example, if you have a balance of £5,000 on a Barclaycard at 24% interest, where you only make the minimum payments and don't spend on the card. Under the old "2.5% of the balance plus the interest charged" rule, it would take around 14 years to clear the balance. In total, you'd expect to pay about £3,500 in interest. But with the new "1% of the balance plus the interest charged" calculation, it will take over 30 years to clear the same balance. You'd then end up paying a whopping £8,500 in interest. Before taking out a new credit card or increasing the amount you borrow, it's vital to consider the consequences. You should only borrow money if you can afford to pay it back. It's always vital to ask yourself if you actually need to borrow before committing to a new credit card, personal loan or overdraft. If you use a credit card, I'd recommend that you always pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period. Lenders have a responsibility to help customers who are in debt. If you're in a debt crisis, your first point of call should be your lender. They might help you out by offering you a reduced interest rate or a temporary payment holiday - so check in with your lender if you're struggling.
Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
RICHARD TICE: Why ditching Miliband's Net Zero madness could save every family £1,000 a year
Labour is facing a make-or-break moment when it comes to its new cult, Net Stupid Zero. This week, Ed Miliband opens his latest renewable energy auction, which allows green developers to bid for lucrative taxpayer-funded contracts. The eco lobby says the auction, officially titled Allocation Round 7 (AR7), will be the centrepiece of Labour's plan to decarbonise the grid by 2030, and that this seventh round must be the biggest yet to 'keep the dream alive'. But it's a dream Britain cannot afford. Inflation is rising. Food prices are once again on the up. And families across the country are cutting back – not just on holidays or takeaways, but on essentials. According to research consultancy More In Common, 60 per cent of Britons list the cost of living as their top concern – and have done so consistently since January last year. And one of the biggest contributory factors to this crisis is an issue that almost no one in Westminster wants to talk about: Net Zero and the spiralling cost of Britain's green energy agenda. Expensive energy is the grenade exploding Britain's economic model. It is not just about switching on the lights and heating homes. It powers industry, transports goods, and underpins every job and price tag. When energy becomes expensive and unreliable, everything else does too. When you hear ministers blaming this crisis on Russian president Vladimir Putin and international fossil fuel markets, remember this: UK energy prices were already among the highest in the developed world before Russia invaded Ukraine. This emergency didn't start in Moscow. It was manufactured in Westminster. We blew up coal plants, messed up nuclear, banned fracking, deterred North Sea investment (which drove up gas imports) and prioritised unreliable green energy. From the other side of the Atlantic, even Donald Trump can see that, writing on his social media site Truth Social: 'North Sea Oil is a treasure chest for the United Kingdom. The taxes are so high, however, that it makes no sense... Incentivise the drillers, fast.' He rightly added that wind is 'the worst form of energy' and a con. When it comes to energy, Westminster has been Putin's most useful idiot. If the US is waking up to that fact, when will Labour? For nearly two decades, clueless politicians from Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have clung to a fantasy: that we could eliminate all hydrocarbon use, build a national grid dominated by wind and solar power, and suffer no consequences. The result? At a time of rising demand we are reliant on an unreliable energy supply and lumbered with higher bills. Three-quarters of the rise in electricity bills over the past decade can be attributed to green energy policies and the multi-billion-pound subsidies paid to renewable investors, according to Net Zero Watch. Yet hundreds of thousands of jobs are being destroyed by high energy prices, while millions more are at risk. Now suppliers are warning that prices will rise again in 2026. Professor Gordon Hughes, a former energy adviser at the World Bank, has warned they could approach 40p per kilowatt hour by 2030 – up from 25p today, which is a catastrophic increase. That's why I took action. Last month, I wrote to major windfarm developers, warning them and their investors to stay away from the AR7 auction. I made it clear that if they press ahead, a Reform government will make them regret it. As Nigel Farage said a few weeks ago about the renegotiation of green subsidy contracts, investors will see 'some haircuts'. Naturally, activists, consultants and subsidy-hunters – the 'Green Blob' – erupted in outrage. But, if these windfarms go ahead, it will be an act of grave economic self-harm. By putting a spanner in the works of Miliband's mad plan, we can stop the 20-year rise in bills. By 2030, my letter alone might be saving households £1,000 a year. But this isn't just about price. It's about security. Much of our ageing fleet of gas-fired power stations is nearing retirement. Thanks to subsidised renewables, few developers are willing to invest in replacements. Why build a power station that often won't run to full capacity, especially when Miliband's plan would make the existing situation even worse? Meanwhile, demand for new gas-fired electricity generating units is exploding globally as countries race to power the AI boom. Lead times of gas infrastructure projects are now as long as eight years. Even if we ordered replacements today, they wouldn't arrive until 2033. That's years after the capacity crunch is expected to bite. If we don't act fast, we'll be forced to ration power. Renewables may also be making the grid dangerously unstable. That's not just an economic risk, it's a public safety threat. Look at Spain and Portugal, where a blackout triggered by solar farm switch-offs killed at least eight people in June. Iberian grid operators restored power in a day, but our system is just as vulnerable. No one knows if the 'smart' gizmos grid managers hope will stabilise the system will actually work when it is under stress. Clearly, they need only fail once – and the whole country goes dark. Worse still, under political pressure, resources have been poured into connecting new renewables to the grid, rather than maintaining what we already have. As a result, our electricity grid infrastructure is crumbling. Ageing transformers are already catching fire, most famously the one that routed power to Heathrow Airport, which went up in flames in March causing the airport to close for 16 hours and 1,000 flights to be cancelled. With demand for replacements sky-high in Europe, those problems will not be fixed any time soon. This is not a functioning energy system. It's a slow-motion car crash. But Mad Miliband is determined to step on the accelerator. Labour cannot say they weren't warned. Just after the election, a YouGov poll found more than half of voters expected Labour to deliver real progress on the cost of living within two years. Twelve months in, and with Reform leading in the polls, we will be there every step of the way holding them to account. We must end the decline, not manage it. As an immediate first step that means trying to minimise the damage of AR7. It means cancelling the folly that is Net Stupid Zero. And it means restoring energy policies that prioritise affordability, reliability, and national security. This isn't just an economic battle. It's a democratic reckoning. The public, rightly, cares about the environment. But they never voted to be poorer, or to be saddled with unsustainable costs like green levies and hidden network charges that flow from Westminster's Net Zero agenda. That's why I won't apologise for going to war with the root causes of this crisis: green energy subsidies and their vested interests. The British people deserve leaders who will fight, not flinch, when livelihoods, families and the national interest are on the line. Let the battle begin.
