IEA responds to Liberal Democrats’ manifesto
Director General at the Institute of Economic Affairs Mark Littlewood commented on the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto
“Calculations of a “Remain bonus” fail to account for the dynamic changes that could take place in our tax system and regulatory structures, creating the right conditions for an economic boom post-Brexit.
“Rather than focusing on maintaining the status quo as the only way to generate growth, the Liberal Democrats should consider potential revenue-raising exercises – including cuts to corporation tax and reassessing red tape mandated by the European Union – which would help transform Britain into an even better place to do business.”
Commenting on the pledge to legalise cannabis:
“Criminalisation of cannabis in the UK has failed. The black market is awash with high-strength, hazardous products. The Liberal Democrats are embracing their name by calling for cannabis to be legalised, which would allow safer, regulated cannabis to displace the more dangerous strains.
If cannabis were legalised, tax revenues alone (before considering savings to public services) could exceed £1 billion per year. This extra tax revenue could be spent on mental health services, other spending pledges made by the Liberal Democrats, or indeed on tax cuts, to put more money back into people’s pockets.”
Commenting on further subsidies to childcare:
“Britain has exceptionally high childcare costs within the OECD because of heavy-handed government intervention. Red tape, especially around staff-to-child ratios, has burdened providers, and excessive regulation has forced some people out of working as childminders all together.
“The further subsidies proposed by the Liberal Democrats (and other parties as well) won’t tackle these regulatory burdens, but merely transfer more costs to taxpayers.”
Commenting on the pledge to put a penny on income tax for the NHS:
“Families are already paying, on average, thousands of pounds per year to access NHS treatment. The primary problem is not funding, but an outdated structure for providing healthcare, which fails to deliver for patients.
“The British public should not be expected to pay a penny more to cover up for a fundamentally broken healthcare system.”
Commenting on the pledge to introduce a 20% rise for zero-hours workers:
“Zero-hours contracts create flexibility for people whose lifestyles do not suit the traditional working week. Crackdowns on these contracts would reduce opportunities for individuals, as is the case in certain European countries, where rigid employment structures have resulted in worryingly high levels of unemployment.”
Notes to editors:
For media enquiries please contact Emily Carver, Media Manager: 07715 942 731
For further IEA reading on regulation post-Brexit, click here.
For further IEA reading on cannabis legalisation, click here.
For further IEA reading on childcare subsidies, click here.
For further IEA reading on NHS reform, click here.
For further IEA reading on the labour market, click here.
The mission of the Institute of Economic Affairs is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of markets in solving economic and social problems.
The IEA is a registered educational charity and independent of all political parties
Latest News from
IFS - Economic downturn and wider NHS disruption likely to hit health hard – especially health of most vulnerable09/04/2020 13:35:00
The coronavirus pandemic poses clear and obvious dangers to the health of individuals who are infected with the virus. But worsening economic conditions and disruptions to NHS services will have important and far-reaching consequences for the health of the broader population.
Minimum pricing had no impact on alcohol-related deaths in Scotland, says new IEA briefing09/04/2020 12:35:00
Minimum pricing had no impact on alcohol-related deaths in Scotland in the eight months after it was introduced, reveals the Institute of Economic Affairs
IFS - Many better-off households may increase savings as spending on 'banned' activities falls. Poorer households spend much more of their income on necessities and will be less resilient to any falls in income09/04/2020 11:35:00
The current crisis will have a big effect on the incomes of a lot of people, but it will also affect their spending.
IEA - Trump right to consider suspending WHO funding09/04/2020 10:35:00
Christopher Snowdon, Head of Lifestyle Economics at the Institute of Economic Affairs, responded to Donald Trump’s comments on the World Health Organisation
IFS - Sector shut-downs during the coronavirus crisis affect the youngest and lowest paid workers, and women, the most09/04/2020 09:35:00
The lockdown in response to the coronavirus pandemic has effectively shut down a number of sectors. Restaurants, shops and leisure facilities have been ordered to close, air travel has halted, and public transport has been greatly reduced.
Kings Fund - Public satisfaction with the NHS rose sharply in 201907/04/2020 10:35:00
New analysis published by The King’s Fund and the Nuffield Trust shows public satisfaction with the NHS jumped to 60 per cent across the UK in 2019, up 7 percentage points from the year before.
COP26 Postponed: Right decision, but the UK mustn’t ignore its climate targets or leadership role, says IPPR07/04/2020 09:35:00
Plan for the post-Covid-19 crisis economic recovery must be for a low carbon ‘clean recovery’
IEA - Government jobs scheme gives business “wrong incentives”02/04/2020 13:35:00
IEA responds to figures from the British Chambers of Commerce
IFS - Fast choices by government provide generous income support to most workers, but leave some with nothing and others with too much02/04/2020 12:35:00
The government is running two large schemes – the Job Retention Scheme (JRS) for employees and the Self-employment Income Support Scheme (SEISS) for the self-employed – and providing more generous benefits in an attempt to protect workers against income losses resulting from the coronavirus.