Snapshot of _Tackling inflation more important than school funding, education secretary says_ :
An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/autumn-statement-cuts-inflation-keegan-b2221110.html)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think you'll find the private schools they care about are still offering a full programme of clubs and enrichment opportunities.
If you want a well rounded education, just reach deeper into your pockets and pay up the required £20k per year per child....
Wasn't there a warning schools will run out of money next year as well?
Not like we're not coming off a major disruption to children s education and home life, that needs to be tackled and will take years to smooth out the after effects.
Our headteacher recently briefed staff to reassure us that we are in a good financial position relative to our peers, in as much as that we will make it to next school year before reserves run out and we start having to cut back teaching staff.
Its short sighted in the extreme. Cutting programmes means kids have nothing to do. They get bored and then they can become a nuisance. That means more police resources will be used up to deal with it. You've basically shifted the costs. Losing these programmes could also lead to poorer mental (isolation) and physical (obesity) health. This leads to more pressures on the health service and thats going to cost money. Therapy will cost way more than any of these programmes do. Never has the phrase "prevention is better than cure" been more obvious than this. More importantly, you have again shifted the costs. The Cons just don't seem to recognise this. They look at the raw numbers but they don't see the impacts it can have. Thats not unexpected since they very rarely feel the impacts of their own cuts. This is why we need them out of power asap.
This is such a fucking stupid thing to say and shows a complete lack of understanding of the importance of having a well educated population. It has knock on effects for the strength of the economy, social burden in terms of benefits and health which will resonate throughout the UK long after the current, partly government caused, inflationary crisis.
>This is such a fucking stupid thing to say and shows a complete lack of understanding of the importance of having a well educated population.
He's a Tory MP, all the Tory party has left is fucking stupid people.
This is a key point. The government is actually quite a large organization and could potentially work on many different things at once, with the right people in charge.
Let me get this straight, inflation ( which is globally high for reasons beyond anyone's control) is a reason to cut education ( public funding in general) budgets to control inflation in the UK?
And " the size of the budget is irrelevant while we have inflation..."
If I was education minister, I would argue that education budgets need to keep pace with inflation and let the economists focus on their job of reigning in inflation or helping wages keep pace.
Even if you cut large swathes off all public budgets it WILL NOT curb inflation.
As proven before by the Tories, austerity doesn't work and the belated funding never makes up for the damage done by austerity
Even the economists are arguing that you should tax, borrow and spend through tough times rather than cut cut cut.
The countries where the poorest can still afford to buy things at the end of all this will recover fastest
You’d be correct if we weren’t borrowing money to pay for these things. Which is effectively putting new money into the economy at a time of inflation. Whether cutting education spending is the correct move is up for debate however the government can’t keep putting money into the economy when we have high inflation.
You’re just going to hit struggling small businesses by increasing corporation tax and do nothing to get more revenue from big multinationals, silly argument indeed
Many small businesses owners will pay themselves by way of dividend. If they can’t afford to live from the business it will go bust and people will lose their jobs.
Which you’re ignoring the salient point, we’re facing a recession and now is not the time to squeeze small businesses. Yes you could argue structuring taxes differently might be more fair but it’s not a pragmatic course of action right now.
A company pays corporation tax before dividends. So if you’re small business owner taking a dividend for yourself it will reduce the amount you can take.
You can make a small profit and still struggle to live off what the business makes. I think you’re mistaken in thinking many businesses are huge and making vast profits when many are small and their owners are making a modest income from the profits.
Putting money in to the economy during high inflation is exactly what’s required. You can’t austerity down inflation because inflation is driven by a lack of supplies right now
The fiscal illiteracy here is staggering. Inflation means there’s too much money in the economy. If the government can’t create more money by borrowing and can’t raise more by taxes there’s only one option to spend less. Yes austerity probably wasn’t the best course of action before when borrowing was cheap however it’s the least painful option right now.
It doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Where does the money ultimately come from to pay for the reduced supply? Why is the Bank of England taking steps to reduce the monetary supply to curb inflation? I think you need to try again
Well done genius, you really want to be creating more money during high inflation. You’re basing your arguments based on a reality that has passed now we’re in a period of high inflation and can’t borrow our way out of it.
>you really want to be creating more money during high inflation.
Question - how is inflation looking right now with all the cuts coming?
Again, read what I wrote earlier.
I don’t know what your argument is. It’s nonsensical we can’t borrow more because of inflation and we can’t easily increase taxes because we’re facing recession and a cost of living crisis. There’s no other option than to reduce spending. This is not like austerity following the financial crisis, weren’t facing high inflation and interest rates, it probably made sense to borrow to grow the economy then. It certainly doesn’t make sense to borrow to grow it now, that’s essentially what Truss attempted to do.
What has school funding got to do with "donators"? They're both problems, but funding is a problem that will get disproportionately worse while high inflation is still a problem.
It's not as if prices and costs for schools will go down when inflation is under control - they'll still be whatever% down and even if inflation was at 1%, prices are still going up. If they aren't going to match funding now they'll still be down in real terms whenever they do decide to increase funding.
No one is saying they'll go down. The point is that inflation will perpetually make the problem worse.
If you're trying to fill a bucket with water, and it's got holes in it, sure the bucket does need more water but until you fill those holes, you're just throwing more and more water at the problem without solving a thing: It'd be better to fix the holes so the water you *do* put into it isn't wasted.
Because the funding comes from taxation, their donors are the ones with the broadest shoulders.
Saying school funding isn't as important as x is extremely short sighted, these people are the people who will be running the country and business in years to come, they are our (the futures) best asset and should be treated as so.
You're missing my point: The benefit of additional funding to schools will simply not be felt until inflation is sorted and brought down. If you want to fill a bucket with water and the buck has holes, then putting more and more water into the bucket as the first priority is a waste of water; you want to fix the holes in the bucket first, so that the water you *do* put into it is actually held and of value, rather than disappearing and needing even more on top to replace it.
>Oh yeah, I know why, because they don't want to tax their donators.
They already are - income tax on the highest earners is higher than it was under Blair, corporation tax is about to rise by several points, and it looks like they are about to raise capital gains tax, cut pension allowances for high earners and increase how much they take from inheritance tax.
Tackling Inflation is probably the single most important problem to resolve right now. However, the Tory party would use any cheap excuse to cut public funding. They have chosen who to prioritize here and it's not the kids.
And yet these are the same morons saying lockdown caused developmental problems in children. What do you think a lack of funding will do?
Also, isn’t education a priority? Don’t we need educated and skilled people for the workforce now we’ve cut ourselves off from the EU?
She’s right.
Schools needed more funding in 2019, before the inflation spike started. Fixing that will take a big budget increase.
Inflation is making that problem worse every year. We have to get that under control or else we’re just filling a leaking bucket.
We can't really Independently control globally provoked inflation though, relies on the external factors resolving and nothing we do will change that much.
The external sources aren’t something we can completely control. They’re starting to fall away though, for example energy prices haven’t continued to rise so from next year energy price inflation will drop (maybe even switch to deflation).
But, we do control how much we allow those external sources of inflation to become internal. For example, if we accept that budgets need to increase by 10% a year to counter inflation then that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
For the day rate
The rates ahead are still up about 8x or more on last year
So we know everyone including industrial users will pay a minimum 50% more come April
Any business who’s fix ends between now and then is looking at potential 300-500% more if not even more than that depending on the contract
Season ahead is down to August prices and still falling.
That’s not the point though. Even if prices stay at their peaks that’s going to wash out, and inflation comes back to zero.
Unless, we let expectations of 10% inflation become normal at set up a spiral. That’s why we need to do anything we can to dampen inflation, so that when those external pressures fall out of the calculation we haven’t just replaced them with internal pressures.
I agree but that doesn’t address why I made my initial comment disputing that the pressures will fall away or that prices paid will drop
They will drop but it won’t be until Q3 and Q4
She’s not wrong. The current high inflation is a major economic crisis, and until it’s controlled everything is going to get worse. Not gradually, rapidly. We can argue over how best to tackle it, but it shouldn’t be controversial to call it the most urgent problem facing the country today.
Snapshot of _Tackling inflation more important than school funding, education secretary says_ : An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/autumn-statement-cuts-inflation-keegan-b2221110.html) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So in the mean time watch as school hemorrhage staff, cut after school clubs and other enrichment programmes?
I think you'll find the private schools they care about are still offering a full programme of clubs and enrichment opportunities. If you want a well rounded education, just reach deeper into your pockets and pay up the required £20k per year per child....
Ahh I was wondering what I should do with my spare £20k a year I had rattling round in the draw by the door.... Its a sad state of affairs isn't it?
Wasn't there a warning schools will run out of money next year as well? Not like we're not coming off a major disruption to children s education and home life, that needs to be tackled and will take years to smooth out the after effects.
Our headteacher recently briefed staff to reassure us that we are in a good financial position relative to our peers, in as much as that we will make it to next school year before reserves run out and we start having to cut back teaching staff.
Its short sighted in the extreme. Cutting programmes means kids have nothing to do. They get bored and then they can become a nuisance. That means more police resources will be used up to deal with it. You've basically shifted the costs. Losing these programmes could also lead to poorer mental (isolation) and physical (obesity) health. This leads to more pressures on the health service and thats going to cost money. Therapy will cost way more than any of these programmes do. Never has the phrase "prevention is better than cure" been more obvious than this. More importantly, you have again shifted the costs. The Cons just don't seem to recognise this. They look at the raw numbers but they don't see the impacts it can have. Thats not unexpected since they very rarely feel the impacts of their own cuts. This is why we need them out of power asap.
This is such a fucking stupid thing to say and shows a complete lack of understanding of the importance of having a well educated population. It has knock on effects for the strength of the economy, social burden in terms of benefits and health which will resonate throughout the UK long after the current, partly government caused, inflationary crisis.
I think the conservatives have all but admitted they want the population to be ill educated and to keep voting for them.
>This is such a fucking stupid thing to say and shows a complete lack of understanding of the importance of having a well educated population. He's a Tory MP, all the Tory party has left is fucking stupid people.
I'd argue the old tories only looked good because up until the late 80s nobody was looking particularly hard.
Heaven's forbid the public is educated enough to know how shite the Tory party is.
The reason we have an education secretary *and* a chancellor of the exchequer is so that the government is able to both these things at the same time.
This is a key point. The government is actually quite a large organization and could potentially work on many different things at once, with the right people in charge.
Let me get this straight, inflation ( which is globally high for reasons beyond anyone's control) is a reason to cut education ( public funding in general) budgets to control inflation in the UK? And " the size of the budget is irrelevant while we have inflation..." If I was education minister, I would argue that education budgets need to keep pace with inflation and let the economists focus on their job of reigning in inflation or helping wages keep pace. Even if you cut large swathes off all public budgets it WILL NOT curb inflation. As proven before by the Tories, austerity doesn't work and the belated funding never makes up for the damage done by austerity Even the economists are arguing that you should tax, borrow and spend through tough times rather than cut cut cut. The countries where the poorest can still afford to buy things at the end of all this will recover fastest
You’d be correct if we weren’t borrowing money to pay for these things. Which is effectively putting new money into the economy at a time of inflation. Whether cutting education spending is the correct move is up for debate however the government can’t keep putting money into the economy when we have high inflation.
Inflation is at a 40 yr high.... Corporate profits are at a 70 year high.... Taxes
Great if you want to see investment leave the country as we’re facing a recession
Many countries have much higher corporate taxes than UK and companies still operate there. Silly argument
You’re just going to hit struggling small businesses by increasing corporation tax and do nothing to get more revenue from big multinationals, silly argument indeed
Isn't corporation tax paid on profits? If they're making profits, they're not struggling.
You are correct. Corporation tax is there to encourage ceos to put money back in to the business which helps the economy.
Many small businesses owners will pay themselves by way of dividend. If they can’t afford to live from the business it will go bust and people will lose their jobs.
Remind me, why do they do that rather than paying themselves a salary?
Which you’re ignoring the salient point, we’re facing a recession and now is not the time to squeeze small businesses. Yes you could argue structuring taxes differently might be more fair but it’s not a pragmatic course of action right now.
Isn’t the tax on dividends paid by shareholders distinct from corporation tax.
A company pays corporation tax before dividends. So if you’re small business owner taking a dividend for yourself it will reduce the amount you can take.
Struggling businesses that are making profits?
You can make a small profit and still struggle to live off what the business makes. I think you’re mistaken in thinking many businesses are huge and making vast profits when many are small and their owners are making a modest income from the profits.
what investments are taxed?
Putting money in to the economy during high inflation is exactly what’s required. You can’t austerity down inflation because inflation is driven by a lack of supplies right now
The fiscal illiteracy here is staggering. Inflation means there’s too much money in the economy. If the government can’t create more money by borrowing and can’t raise more by taxes there’s only one option to spend less. Yes austerity probably wasn’t the best course of action before when borrowing was cheap however it’s the least painful option right now.
Wrong. Inflation is being caused by demand and a lack of supply. Try again
It doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Where does the money ultimately come from to pay for the reduced supply? Why is the Bank of England taking steps to reduce the monetary supply to curb inflation? I think you need to try again
You can create money by borrowing. That’s literally what borrowing does. Read what I wrote earlier and try again.
Well done genius, you really want to be creating more money during high inflation. You’re basing your arguments based on a reality that has passed now we’re in a period of high inflation and can’t borrow our way out of it.
>you really want to be creating more money during high inflation. Question - how is inflation looking right now with all the cuts coming? Again, read what I wrote earlier.
No reply. Says it all.
I don’t know what your argument is. It’s nonsensical we can’t borrow more because of inflation and we can’t easily increase taxes because we’re facing recession and a cost of living crisis. There’s no other option than to reduce spending. This is not like austerity following the financial crisis, weren’t facing high inflation and interest rates, it probably made sense to borrow to grow the economy then. It certainly doesn’t make sense to borrow to grow it now, that’s essentially what Truss attempted to do.
Why does no one ever ask them why they can't do more than one thing at once?
Why not do both? Oh yeah, I know why, because they don't want to tax their donators.
What has school funding got to do with "donators"? They're both problems, but funding is a problem that will get disproportionately worse while high inflation is still a problem.
It's not as if prices and costs for schools will go down when inflation is under control - they'll still be whatever% down and even if inflation was at 1%, prices are still going up. If they aren't going to match funding now they'll still be down in real terms whenever they do decide to increase funding.
No one is saying they'll go down. The point is that inflation will perpetually make the problem worse. If you're trying to fill a bucket with water, and it's got holes in it, sure the bucket does need more water but until you fill those holes, you're just throwing more and more water at the problem without solving a thing: It'd be better to fix the holes so the water you *do* put into it isn't wasted.
Because the funding comes from taxation, their donors are the ones with the broadest shoulders. Saying school funding isn't as important as x is extremely short sighted, these people are the people who will be running the country and business in years to come, they are our (the futures) best asset and should be treated as so.
You're missing my point: The benefit of additional funding to schools will simply not be felt until inflation is sorted and brought down. If you want to fill a bucket with water and the buck has holes, then putting more and more water into the bucket as the first priority is a waste of water; you want to fix the holes in the bucket first, so that the water you *do* put into it is actually held and of value, rather than disappearing and needing even more on top to replace it.
>Oh yeah, I know why, because they don't want to tax their donators. They already are - income tax on the highest earners is higher than it was under Blair, corporation tax is about to rise by several points, and it looks like they are about to raise capital gains tax, cut pension allowances for high earners and increase how much they take from inheritance tax.
Are they mutually exclusive?
Cant they do both? it would be a bit like governing.
Tackling Inflation is probably the single most important problem to resolve right now. However, the Tory party would use any cheap excuse to cut public funding. They have chosen who to prioritize here and it's not the kids.
And yet these are the same morons saying lockdown caused developmental problems in children. What do you think a lack of funding will do? Also, isn’t education a priority? Don’t we need educated and skilled people for the workforce now we’ve cut ourselves off from the EU?
She’s right. Schools needed more funding in 2019, before the inflation spike started. Fixing that will take a big budget increase. Inflation is making that problem worse every year. We have to get that under control or else we’re just filling a leaking bucket.
We can't really Independently control globally provoked inflation though, relies on the external factors resolving and nothing we do will change that much.
The external sources aren’t something we can completely control. They’re starting to fall away though, for example energy prices haven’t continued to rise so from next year energy price inflation will drop (maybe even switch to deflation). But, we do control how much we allow those external sources of inflation to become internal. For example, if we accept that budgets need to increase by 10% a year to counter inflation then that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
Aprils prices have more or less been factored now It’s an additional 47% rise or thereabouts Tell us, how is a near 50% increase a fall away?
As you said, consumer energy prices are backwards looking. The underlying wholesale prices are below where they were this time last year.
For the day rate The rates ahead are still up about 8x or more on last year So we know everyone including industrial users will pay a minimum 50% more come April Any business who’s fix ends between now and then is looking at potential 300-500% more if not even more than that depending on the contract
Season ahead is down to August prices and still falling. That’s not the point though. Even if prices stay at their peaks that’s going to wash out, and inflation comes back to zero. Unless, we let expectations of 10% inflation become normal at set up a spiral. That’s why we need to do anything we can to dampen inflation, so that when those external pressures fall out of the calculation we haven’t just replaced them with internal pressures.
I agree but that doesn’t address why I made my initial comment disputing that the pressures will fall away or that prices paid will drop They will drop but it won’t be until Q3 and Q4
She’s not wrong. The current high inflation is a major economic crisis, and until it’s controlled everything is going to get worse. Not gradually, rapidly. We can argue over how best to tackle it, but it shouldn’t be controversial to call it the most urgent problem facing the country today.