To win big business, Britain needs government investment - not tax cuts
Deficit or not, the UK is spending far too little to get our engines going. What major player would look at our Victorian railways and say—this looks like a reliable, efficient economy to invest in?
Earlier this week, Keir Starmer hosted the government’s investment summit, gathering top business leaders to rally support for UK industry. The event was a broad success, securing an impressive £63bn in investments. Yet familiar criticisms arose from the right: for Britain to win truly big business, the government must prioritise tax cuts and deregulation.
It takes some cynicism to call for another bonfire of regulations before the embers of public outrage over the Grenfell inquiry have quite died down; and it takes wilful misreading of basic economic truths to be calling for more tax cuts. The UK’s post-Brexit success depends less on showy but marginal tax cuts, and more on strategic investments in public goods that fuel long-term growth.
Plenty business leaders agree. Mark Campbell, co-founder of Higgidy Pies, called for tax rises on business, telling the Guardian that “The UK needs a fairer tax system to invest in its future". Graham Hobson, the millionaire co-founder of Photobox agreed, adding: “Entrepreneurs are driven by passion, problem-solving, and creating value – not by low taxes.” It’s the first and last time I’ll say this: The millionaires are right.
Cancelling major infrastructure projects like HS2 sent the wrong message to the world: that even Britain won’t invest in it’s own future.
Reviving the UK’s economy must start with the basics: infrastructure, healthcare, and public services. If the government can’t push forward on key projects, no amount of tax cuts will compensate for the lack of functional services that businesses rely on.
Take HS2, for instance. This is far more than just a high-speed rail project - even if we, alone in Western Europe, still seem to think of fast trains as unaffordable luxury. HS2 is a crucial, irreplaceable artery for unlocking stagnating regional potential and attracting investment to areas long neglected by infrastructure spending. Since Brexit, UK growth has slowed, and public services—after a decade of austerity—have spiralled. HS2, perpetually delayed and politically contentious, embodies the deeper issue: successive governments’ inability to prioritise long-term investments.
When international investors assess the UK's prospects, all they’ve seen lately is decline. Cancelling major infrastructure projects like HS2 sent the wrong message to the world: that even Britain won’t invest in it’s own future.
But on Thursday, unconfirmed reports that HS2 would be extended once again to run from Euston to Crewe had tongues wagging. If true, this signals that alongside deeply harmful reticence on issues like the two-kid benefit cap, Labour does seem intent on fostering deep-rooted, sustainable growth. Investing the requisite billions in the nation’s infrastructure suggests a government that knows that spending on long-term projects today is the only way to ensure tomorrow; that bringing public services to a high level is a lifesaving boost for an economy, not a drag on it.
We need more of this kind of thinking and less of Reveees trying to be both George Osborne and Gordon Brown. While rumours of increased NHS funding are welcome, reports of cuts to unprotected departments are alarming. The NHS, our other public services and our physical infrastructure all require significant financial boosts - consistent, across the board; not robbing Peter to pay for Paul. Labour should rethink its fiscal constraints and be bold enough to borrow and invest both in the UK’s services and its population. Only then can Britain become an attractive place for businesses to thrive—and for its people to prosper.
From the Blackpool Lead - now joining us on Substack!
ICYMI, has a new column:
And from the archives…
This week, Leah recommends Rob Delaney's A Heart That Works. “I don't know why it takes a shitload of suffering to make an already nice man extremely nice and human - but this is Rob,” she says. Dimi has finally watched Shogun, and he thoroughly recommends it - not necessarily for the most breathtaking plot twists (early Game of Thrones it is not), but for the majestic acting, the avoidance of tired tropes - especially at the ending - and the gorgeous cinematography and design; it’s almost worth watching just for the textiles alone. Lillian recommends Say Nothing, a “gripping story of murder and memory in Northern Ireland during The Troubles” ahead of the TV series set to premiere on November 14.
Enjoy your weekend, folks,
The Lead
The huge amounts that Britain taxes it people it certainly wouldn’t hurt for the government to finance all or at least a very major part of the cost. If the people are required to feed the kitty just watch it poop I would suggest all their money first goes into the reputable bank that will agree to hold the money in escrow for an agent also picked an agree on by a majority vote of at least 70% consent of those paying into the deal this will be under the custody of a Swiss accounting firm again the best there is known for its honesty integrity and its ability to provide information to clients at a days notice on any matter they handle for their clients who as I already said are the British tax payers who are paying over an above their usual taxable amounts by a % TBD and agree to by those most affected which would be those being taxed that are in fact putting their own money into the fund (mention before) to pay for a completed project. The project if it has any additional costs or expenses that need to be funded no matter the amount or the reasons for increase in of the amount(s) of that the project builders are responsible for or not responsible for be they cost of material increases no matter how significant or in significant.
Furthermore it will be the duty of the government to ensure that they watch the costs of the project to insure no such occurrence in fact occurs.
back to Swiss company accounting the books will balance each day at days end and again at each week weeks end if simple double entry book keeping can be used to balance someone’s personal check book I can’t see why a project’s checks can’t be used to keep track of all the items and companies that are paid by check and all items companies corporations individuals individual business etc cetera will paid by check for their pay be that daily weekly monthly quarterly or bi yearly, yearly.
If it’s discovered that any of the afore mentioned have misappropriated misuse or otherwise violated laws or regulations or even misstated what the requested check was to be used for or the money that check represents was misuse misdirected or inappropriately applied for any other reason than the reason requested for the check ie money then any all laws concerning misappropriation of funds or Monies or any other illicit manner of obtaining money by subterfuge misstatement or other means of obtaining money using deceit or deception will apply and directed to the person(s) in direct relation with courts that brings such charges to the courts attention for reviewing in order to bring criminal charges against those mentioned for prosecution by a criminal court and a a jury of their peers will called to proclaim the verdict if guilty or innocent where the judge will make their final judgement in accordance with the laws taking the juries ruling into consideration.
Please note the following grammatical error - position of 'only' in the sentence - 'this link can be used only once' is the correct word order.