In the emergency fiscal statement expected next week, the latest Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer has promised a new approach. Writing in the Financial Times, Kwasi Kwarteng argued that “the same old economic managerialism has left us with a stagnating economy and anaemic growth” and that “we need to be decisive and do things differently” to deliver stronger economic growth and living standards.[1]
But Kwasi Kwarteng is a continuity Conservative chancellor. From George Osborne onwards, Tory chancellors have promised to unleash growth and productivity by reducing supposed burdens on business in the form of protections for workers. And they have repeatedly promised tax cuts over investing in our public services, infrastructure, or collective security. These policies have failed comprehensively on the trade union movement’s goals for the UK of decent pay, jobs, rights, and services. But they have failed on their own terms as well, with growth, investment and productivity falling well behind our peers. The last twelve years of Conservative government have demonstrated decisively that cuts don’t work and that, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, the government is making the wrong people pay.
These persistent attacks on workers’ living standards have left working people in the UK particularly vulnerable to rising prices, and, even after action to partially cap energy prices, millions of families face a cost-of-living emergency this winter. An energy cap of £2,500 will mean energy costs have risen 18 times faster than wages in the year to October 2022. The latest figures for food prices show them rising at 13.4 per cent[4] and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation estimates that low-income families will face an £800 shortfall between their incomes and other costs over the winter.[5]
A fresh approach first needs to respond to this crisis – giving families more help to get through this winter.
But the chancellor should also take this opportunity to set out a genuinely new approach that builds for fair growth and decent jobs – recognising that rewarding the workers who keep the country running is the best way to ensure that growth benefits everyone. That would include:
Government should:
Government should:
Government may use the autumn budget to set out a fuller plan to fund public services. But it must recognise the crisis they currently face.
Workers and businesses depend on strong and resilient public services but a decade of government-imposed pay restraint and under-funding is driving a recruitment and retention crisis in the sector. Vacancy rates in health and social care have reached record highs at 10.5 per cent[6] and 9.5 per cent[7] respectively. In education, retention rates have reached a historic low - just two-thirds of early-career teachers (67 per cent) remain in the profession after five years.[8]
Staff shortages put huge strain on those who remain as they try to plug the gaps, fuelling excessive workloads and long working hours. This undermines the quality of our public services, and leads to high rates of attrition and absenteeism.
Backlogs in hospital waiting times, rising ill health, and our stretched education system let down UK workers, and disrupt UK businesses. Investing to restore our public services, including childcare and social care, must be a part of the government’s economic plan.
Public services depend on fair taxation. When considering tax changes, government must ensure that those with the broadest shoulders pay their fair share. Between 2008 and 2020, levels of financial wealth rose by 80 per cent, with 61 per cent of this going to the richest ten per cent. Government should equalise capital gains tax rates with income tax to start ensuring the fairer taxation of wealth. And the windfall gains experienced by oil and gas giants should be taxed at a higher rate.
The following sections outline the impact of policies over the past decade, and the current situation facing workers. The final section outlines the new approach workers need in more detail.
[1] Kwasi Kwarteng (September 4th 2022) ‘A Liz Truss government would be unashamedly pro-growth’ at https://www.ft.com/content/3c067e28-e33a-4bda-9f2e-81a109966b20
[2] TUC (2022) Unpublished analysis of 2022 pay award
[3] Source: TUC analysis of ONS data, based on regular average weekly earnings. Earnings are adjusted for inflation using CPI, June 2022=100.
[4] CPI figures for August 2022
[5] Joseph Rowntree Foundation (8th September 2022) Joseph Rowntree Foundation highlights the gap in support that remains for people on low incomes after Liz Truss energy announcement at https://www.jrf.org.uk/press/joseph-rowntree-foundation-highlights-gap-support-remains-people-low-incomes-after-liz-truss
[6] NHS digital (2021) https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/nhs-vacancies-survey/april-2015---september-2021-experimental-statistics
Since 2010, pay determination in the public sector has largely been dictated by pay policy set by government. Public sector workers have suffered some of the worst falls in pay, following government-imposed cuts, freezes and caps. This trend continued in 2022, with pay awards in the public sector well below the rate of inflation. Latest figures show that in the three months to August 2022, real wages fell by £103 per month compared to the same month last year for all workers, and by £190 for public sector workers. 1
Reduced pay meant reduced spending by public sector workers, which damaged the economy and contributed to reduced private sector pay.
Public sector pay cuts were part of a strategy of austerity that Conservative ministers promised would enable growth in the private sector, leading to increases in workers’ living standards. In his Mais lecture of 2015, George Osborne, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, held fast to his goals from 2010: “Monetary activism to support demand in the economy and repair our financial sector. Fiscal responsibility to underpin economic stability. And supply side reform to deliver sustainable increases in our standard of living.”2
This strategy has comprehensively failed, with workers experiencing the longest squeeze on pay – and their living standards – for 200 years. In cash terms workers lost £20,000 in the years to 2021, compared to a scenario in which pay had kept pace with inflation.3
The decade of brutal pay cuts and freezes have had a devastating impact on frontline workers and their families. Since the pandemic began, the number of children living in poverty in key worker households has grown to nearly 1 million.4
In some regions, such as the North East, North West and East of England, more than two-fifths of children living in key worker households are now living in poverty. Without immediate government action, this crisis will grow, with key worker child poverty expected to grow from 1 million in 2022 to 1.1 million in 2023.
This pay squeeze looks set to continue. The latest pay statistics show real pay is down 4 per cent in the latest quarter (using CPI) - together with last month’s figures showing a decline of 4.1 per cent, these are record declines on recent figures that extend back to 2008.
While global pressures on prices are affecting many countries, the UK’s pay performance is particularly bad. In June this year the OECD issued pay and inflation forecasts showing UK real pay performance as the worst of all G7 countries over 2022 to 2023, and the fourth worst of all 35 OECD countries.
The economic strategy pursued by Conservative governments over the last decade has led to significant pay cuts for workers, but significant gains for the already wealthy. In aggregate terms, total financial wealth over 2008-10 to 2018-20 increased by around £0.9tn (80 per cent) from £1.1tn to £1.9tn. Some 61% of the increase went to the top decile, the (already almost insignificant) financial wealth of the lowest five deciles increased by only 3.7%.
This contrasts with losses to employees as a whole over 2008-2022 who saw their wages lose around £0.6tn compared to keeping pace with inflation (this is the total of the £20,000 loss in pay on average for each employee). This extreme inequality should be addressed when designing new tax policy.
Kwasi Kwarteng’s ‘new’ approach to growth includes all too familiar “unshackling” business from “unsuitable regulations” 5
and there have been widespread reports that the new government plans to cut employment rights underpinned by EU legislation. 6
As a co-author of Britannia Unchained, Kwasi Kwarteng blamed Britain’s poor productivity on workers, claiming that too many “prefer a lie-in to hard work”.
But there is clear evidence that workers in the UK work some of the longest hours in Europe 7
and do not have sufficient protection at work. Government has failed to tackle new forms of insecurity, ignoring the rise in zero hours contracts, bogus self-employment, and aggressive new tactics by employers to drive down rights. More than one in ten workers, 3.7 million people, now face insecurity at work, over half a million more than in 2010 8
The lack of a strong framework of rights for workers was underlined by the widespread use of ‘fire and rehire’ tactics during the pandemic, where workers were asked to accept poorer terms and conditions or face the sack, and by the scandal at P&O Ferries, where 800 workers were fired without notice. 9
Despite these egregious breaches of current law and common decency, the Boris Johnson government dropped its much trumpeted commitment to an Employment Bill.
This failure has had a disproportionate impact on Black workers. The most recent analysis found that BME workers are far more likely than White workers to be in insecure work. Nearly one in six (15.7 per cent) BME men are in insecure work. Some 12.4 per cent of BME women are in the same position, and among employees (excluding the self-employed) BME women are the most likely group to be subjected to insecure work.
Structural and institutional racism also means BME workers face a lower employment rate and a higher unemployment rate than White workers. While the employment rate for BME workers has improved over the past decade, it remains significantly below the employment rate for White workers (68.3 per cent compared to 77.0 per cent). This is especially true for BME women. The employment rate for BME women has increased by almost 13 per cent over the past decade, yet it remains substantially below the employment rate for White men (61.7 per cent compared to 79.5 per cent).
Rather than acting to protect workers, Conservative governments over the last decade have repeatedly claimed that a strategy of slashing rights that protect workers would help boost growth and living standards. The Beecroft review, commissioned by the Coalition government and published in 2012, falsely argued that “much of employment law and regulation impedes the search for efficiency and competitiveness”. 10
Following the review the government increased the qualification period for unfair dismissal from one year to two, and introduced fees for workers wishing to challenge their employer at an Employment Tribunal (a decision that was later overturned in the High Court in a case brought by Unison).
In a further attempt to claim that workers’ rights were a barrier to UK success, the Conservative government then introduced the Trade Union Act in 2016, placing significant barriers on the right to strike for better pay and conditions. 11
These reforms have fuelled fear and insecurity at work. And they have had no positive impact on the UK’s poor rates of growth, productivity and investment. In fact, international advice now recommends that strengthening workers’ rights is key to an effective economic strategy. In the OECD’s latest employment outlook, published in September 2022, they argue that “strengthening collective bargaining is key to ensuring a fair distribution of the inflation shock between workers and employers. In the longer term, a stronger voice for workers and more robust competition between employers would ensure a re-balancing of bargaining power”. 12
There are widespread expectations that the current chancellor will drop the commitment to raise corporation tax rates for larger businesses from 19 to 25 per cent in April 2023. Kwasi Kwarteng argued for immediate action on “cutting taxes, putting money back into people’s pockets, and unshackling our businesses from burdensome taxes and unsuitable regulations”. 13
This also replicates Conservative strategy over the last decade, where corporation and personal tax cuts were prioritised over public expenditure, while public services and infrastructure investment, including in energy security, underwent deep cuts.
From 2010 to 2016 corporation tax was cut from 28% to 19%. The Social Market Foundation estimated there was a net cost to the Exchequer between 2010 and 2018 of £72.6bn. 14
In Budget 2016 the Treasury announced a new plan to decisively move the CT rate to the bottom of the G20 league: an announced 17% rate in 2020 (since abandoned) was aimed at moving the UK below Russia, Saudi Arabia and Turkey – as illustrated on the chart below. 15
The new plan to scrap the rise in corporation tax (from 19% to 25%) proposed in the March 2021 Budget, would cost £17bn a year, according to government estimates.16
Even were the rate raised to 25%, it would still the lowest CT rate of all G7 countries.17
There is no evidence that cuts in corporation tax are an effective way to boost investment. On the contrary, international comparisons show that UK investment as a share of GDP has been among the lowest of all G7 countries since the 1990s. Over the 2010s the government’s drastic efforts on corporation tax saw no sustained increases in investment.
The chart below shows figures for the UK only on business investment, GDP and the rate of corporation tax.
The average annual growth of business investment was only a little higher over the post financial crisis period (at 3.7 per cent) when rates were cut, than the 3.1 per cent per year ahead of the global financial crisis (though there is some distortion from a high figure in 2005, related partly to changed ownership of nuclear power). And while there was some expansion in the mid-2010s in particular, gains were brought to a decisive end after the EU referendum. Fundamentally this investment did nothing to boost wider GDP growth or living standards. GDP growth after the financial crisis has averaged just 2.0 per cent a year when ahead of the financial crisis growth was 2.7% a year.
Subsidising investment is a poor substitute for a virtuous circle of more sustainable economic growth. With pay higher and demand robust, firms will expect higher consumption and invest to expand the economy. So far since the global financial crisis, investment has had very limited impact on the strength of the economy as a whole.
Further proposed cuts to personal taxes look likely to disproportionately benefit richer households, doing nothing to tackle the current living standards emergency:
The TUC has set out plans for fair taxes to help tackle the crisis in social care. Equalising capital gains tax rates with income tax rates and removing exemptions could raise, on average, up to £17bn a year, and would be a recognition of the fact that while workers face a cost-of-living emergency, levels of wealth have soared. The typical family in the richest 10 per cent of households had £1.3m more in wealth per adult than the typical family in the fifth decile of the wealth distribution – an increase of 50 per cent in the wealth gap between 2006-8 and 2016-18. 23
Skill shortages have often been cited as a cause of the UK’s poor economic performance. But in the last decade, both government and business have slashed their investment in skills.
Spending on adult education and apprenticeships fell by 38 per cent in real terms between 2010-2011 and 2020-21, according to analysis by the Nuffield Foundation. 24
The 2021 Spending Review failed to reverse the impact of these cuts, with spending on apprenticeships and adult education 25 per cent lower in 2024-25 compared with 2010-2011.25
This analysis did not take account of the impact of soaring inflation on budgets.
TUC research 26
has highlighted that job-related training provided by employers has been in decline since the mid-1990s and this trend intensified during the pandemic. UK employers invest just half the EU average in training. If investment per employee equalled the EU average, there would be an additional £6.5bn spent each year.27
Despite repeated complaints from both government and business about skills shortages and productivity levels, there has been no action to ensure that workers can get the skills they need.
Deep cuts to social security for those both in and out of work have been a key plank of the Conservative economic agenda over the past decade.
Conservative governments have cut around £14bn a year from the social security budget..28
TUC analysis shows that the real value of the standard benefits payment is now worth £52 less a month.29
Government stated that social security reform, including the introduction of Universal Credit, would ensure work pays and reduce in-work poverty. Yet the majority of people in poverty (57 per cent, or 8.3 million people) live in a working household. 29
This is a record high.
These cuts lie behind the dramatic rise in the need for emergency food aid. The Trussell Trust says the need for emergency food parcels dramatically increased following the £20 a week cut to Universal Credit and rapid increases in living costs. 30
The Conservative government’s strategy of cutting pay, rights, taxes, skills and social security over the last decade has left working people in the UK facing a crisis of real pay, soaring poverty, weakened public services, and an epidemic of insecure work. And it has left households in the UK particularly vulnerable to the sharp rises in prices following global supply chain pressures and the war in Ukraine.
The UK government has now provided a partial cap on energy bills, restricting the standard energy cap to £2,500 a year (though actual prices will vary depending on how much energy households use), and promising support to business. But this will be insufficient to address the cost-of-living emergency facing families and, by failing to impose a fair and ambitious windfall tax on energy company excess profits, it is making the wrong people pay.
The government appears set on attempting to cut its way to growth. But the evidence of the last decade shows that this is a disastrous strategy.
Government’s first priority in this emergency intervention must be to help families suffering the consequences of this failure, and a cost-of-living emergency:
Government should protect families facing a cost-of-living emergency now by bringing forward inflation-proof increases to social security, pensions and benefits and the national minimum wage to October, rather than waiting to April.
This should be a first step towards putting the UK on a path to decent minimum wages, social security and pensions. The TUC is calling for:
But government must also make it clear that there is a better way to build for growth, investing in the working people across the UK who deliver it. That should include the following aims and policies.
The real wage crisis facing the UK lies at the heart of the cost of-living crisis. Government must set out a plan to address it that includes:
Efforts to induce business to invest in the economy through ever greater tax cuts have comprehensively failed. Instead we need to change the rules to encourage a long-term approach to delivering decent jobs and growth. That should include:
To boost domestic manufacturing, services and technology development, and reap the full benefit of developments in infrastructure and renewable energy, the government should adopt strong trade and procurement policies to strengthen local supply chains and raise employment standards.
This emergency event will, we assume, be followed by a more comprehensive spending review in the autumn, where government must set out its plans to reboot public services following a decade of cuts, and to invest in social care and childcare. This should include:
Tax changes must ensure that those with the broadest shoulders pay their fair share in this national effort. This should include:
Want to hear about our latest news and blogs?
Sign up now to get it straight to your inbox
To access the admin area, you will need to setup two-factor authentication (TFA).