Don't panic—yet

The government should stick to its course despite worrying economic figures

Britain's stuttering economy

CRISIS may be too strong a word for it, but Britain’s economic predicament is more than a little uncomfortable. Only a year after climbing out of recession, the economy shrank again in the final quarter of last year. The surprising weakness was caused in part by unusually cold weather but it is not fully explained by it. A frail economy ought at least to be free of price pressures but Britons have had no such luck. Inflation rose to 3.7% in December. Further increases in the cost of imported commodities and this month’s rise in value-added tax (VAT) are likely to push the rate above 4% by spring. The VAT hike was needed to help shrink a budget deficit that is on track to reach 10% of GDP this financial year. This toxic mix of falling GDP, high inflation and a big budget deficit is rare among rich countries but not unique; Greece suffers from it, too.
Such a run of bad news looks like an argument for a policy rethink. If the economy stays weak, it may not be robust enough to withstand further deficit-cutting measures, including a planned rise in national-insurance contributions this April. The persistence of high inflation (it has been well above the 2% target for most of the last three years) calls into question the idea that the Bank of England could counter the effects of fiscal tightening by easing monetary policy. Its benchmark interest rate is already as low as it can feasibly go, and a further round of “quantitative easing” would stretch too far the gap between the bank’s objective of low inflation and its actions. A concern that businesses and wage earners might think policymakers were going soft on inflation led two of the bank’s nine-strong monetary-policy committee to vote for an increase in interest rates this month (see article).
Yet nasty as these numbers are, they should not lead the government to change its policy. For all the understandable anxiety, the economy has proved stronger than seemed possible in June when George Osborne, the chancellor of the exchequer, first set out his budget plans. Much of the pressure on inflation will subside in a year’s time. The slump in output may not endure either. The cold kept customers away from hotels, restaurants, airports and leisure centres, and stopped building work. Britain’s statisticians reckon that, without the bad weather, GDP would have been flat, but that is far from certain. Business surveys suggest the economy had slowed but was still growing. It is not unusual for recoveries to stall. America’s economy slowed last year before reviving. Britain’s endured a dud quarter or two as it emerged from previous recessions.

Experience cautions against a panic reaction to one bad number. But what if it transpires that the weather was not the main culprit and the economy has lost momentum? Mr Osborne has often seemed too confident that private-sector spending will fill the gap in demand left by fiscal austerity. That he has a medium-term plan for fixing the deficit is welcome (it would be nice if America had one). Indeed, his very enthusiasm for budget cuts gives him room with bond markets to postpone some of the pain. Spending cuts tend to reduce budget deficits more effectively than tax increases, so these should not be delayed. But if more bad figures emerge a reprieve on new taxes may prove to be wise.
Deficit-financed public spending is not a growth strategy. At best, it can provide a bridge between the consumer-led growth that Britain leant on before recession to the export- and investment-driven recovery it needs now. Strong global growth, high corporate profits and a weaker currency should allow Britain to grow. If the economy cannot thrive in these circumstances, it is in real trouble.