IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Britain's fiscal problems



Britain's public sector deficit in the 1990s has been much too large to allow the public sector to maintain its balance sheet position. In order to do this the current account deficit has to be reduced from its 1995/6 figure of 3_ per cent of GDP to close to zero. Government plans show this being achieved by 1999/2000. A comparison of the current position with past behaviour shows that the deficit is unusually high, after due account is taken of the state of the economy and of electoral influences on the public finances. The high deficit is a consequence of unusually high spending rather than low taxation and the position has worsened since Britain left the ERM. The National Institute model allows us to compare with our base run a situation in which public finances evolve in line with past behaviour. This reduces consumption in the 1990s but raises it after 2000. An internal real rate of return of 3.85 per cent p.a. equates the current value of the two consumption paths. On the other hand the level of employment is considerably higher in the early stages of our base run and only slightly lower in the later stages.

Suggested Citation

  • Nigel Pain & Dr Martin Weale & Dr Garry Young, 1997. "Britain's fiscal problems," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 113, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:nsr:niesrd:224

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Peter C. B. Phillips & Bruce E. Hansen, 1990. "Statistical Inference in Instrumental Variables Regression with I(1) Processes," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(1), pages 99-125.
    2. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    3. Banerjee, Anindya, et al, 1986. "Exploring Equilibrium Relationships in Econometrics through Static Models: Some Monte Carlo Evidence," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 48(3), pages 253-277, August.
    4. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
    5. Fischer, Andreas M., 1990. "Cointegration and I(0) measurement error bias," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 255-259, November.
    6. Li, Yikang & Maddala, G. S. & Rush, Mark, 1995. "New small sample estimators for cointegration regression: Low-pass spectral filter method," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 123-129, February.
    7. Granger, Clive W J, 1986. "Developments in the Study of Cointegrated Economic Variables," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 48(3), pages 213-228, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Annamaria Simonazzi & Paola Villa, 1999. "Flexibility and Growth," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 281-311.
    2. Kahanec, Martin & Zimmermann, Klaus F. & Kureková, Lucia Mýtna & Biavaschi, Costanza, 2013. "Report No. 56: Labour Migration from EaP Countries to the EU – Assessment of Costs and Benefits and Proposals for Better Labour Market Matching," IZA Research Reports 56, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    3. Pain, Nigel & Young, Garry, 2004. "The macroeconomic impact of UK withdrawal from the EU," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 387-408, May.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nsr:niesrd:224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Library & Information Manager). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.