Many names have been proposed for our pathology: Thatcherism, Reaganism, austerity, Trussonomics. But they are all synonyms for the same ideology, a doctrine hardly anyone in public life can bring themselves to name:Ā neoliberalism. It has dominated decision-making in the UKĀ for 44 years. One result is that the cumulative underfunding of public services is now approaching crisis point, possibly threatening state failure. Wednesdayās autumn statement will do nothing to address it.
Every week, we see another neglected liability emerging: collapsing classrooms,Ā crumbling flood defences,Ā failing tower blocks, overwhelmed hospitals,Ā understaffed social care, spouting sewers,Ā lethal housing. What would it cost to put the country right, to restore general prosperity and a functioning state?
This article is a very rough and provisional attempt to tot up the deficits and create an account of what, over 20 years, the UK would need to spend to create a viable, safe and inclusive public realm. Some of the following figures are for England only, some are UK-wide, so further work would be needed to resolve them properly. I hope others will improve it.
Some estimates are well-established. The NHS funding deficit ā the cumulative difference between theĀ 4% annual increaseĀ a modern health system needs to cope with ageing populations and technological change, and what it has received since 2010 āĀ is Ā£200bn. TheĀ current annual increaseĀ is 0.1%. Reversing the funding shortfall would cost Ā£7bn a year, while addressing the historic shortfall would need another Ā£10bn per year.
The governmentās estimate for the price of a modern sewerage system, in England alone,Ā is Ā£350-Ā£600bn. Of course, it proposes no such thing. Currently the privatised water companies are spending just £1.4bn a yearĀ getting their shit together.
We also need a massive overhaul of water supply. The water companies say theyāll spend £96bn in totalĀ between 2025 and 2030 (believe it when you see it), but at current rates of repair, theyāll replace our leaky pipes in aĀ mere 2,000 years. Scarcely any new reservoir capacity has been commissionedĀ since privatisation. Fixing the water network might cost an additional Ā£100bn,but in the absence of useful figures from the industry, this can only be a guess. With the lower estimate for sewer replacement, we could face, across 20 years, a further Ā£22bn in annual spending.
The government could save some money on flood control by investing inĀ natural flood management, but thereās little doubt that the budgetĀ needs to riseĀ faster than our rising seas and rivers, from the current Ā£5.2bnĀ across six years. Flooding is one of 34 climate risks listed by the governmentās Climate Change Committee as ārequiring urgent attentionā. But addressing our climate deficiencies might not require an overall budget increase, as so much money is currently wasted. For example, if the government were to spend Ā£8bnĀ making 3m homes more energy efficient, it would save much of the £78bnĀ across two years used to subsidise our energy bills. But, in deference to the fossil fuel industry, itĀ refuses to invest.
In 2019, Shelter calculated that building the 3.1m council homes required to meet housing need would cost a gross £10.7bn a year. As this would save money on housing benefit and generate tax, the estimated net cost across 20 years would be £3.8bn a year.
In 2021, a construction industry estimate suggested that the true cost of removing combustible cladding from housing blocksĀ would be Ā£50bn. But the government has budgetedĀ only Ā£5bn. TheĀ failure to fix structural flawsĀ in 575 large panel system tower blocks has also hit home with theĀ evacuation of Barton HouseĀ in Bristol after it was deemed unsound. Enfield council in London estimated that refurbishing two such blocksĀ would cost Ā£53m. If this is average, weāre looking at Ā£15bn. Set aside Ā£3bn a year to address these two crises.
Labourās Building Schools for the Future programme, which the Conservatives scrapped in 2010, peaked at £8bn a year. The repair bill alone was estimated in 2021Ā at Ā£11bn. That was before building costs inflation, theĀ aerated concrete scandalĀ and the discovery that 700,000 pupils now studyĀ in dilapidated buildings. Current total spending is £1.8bn a year. Restoring the old funding formula and addressing the backlog might cost an annual Ā£10bn.
Other public buildings are in a similar state. Parliament alone,Ā using the cheapest option, would cost Ā£7-13bn to refurbish. Across the government estate, weād be lucky to see an additional repair and upgrade bill of less than Ā£2bn a year,perhaps much more ā I can find no total figures.
So much public money is wasted on transport that a modern, efficient network would cost much less than our antiquated, failing version. The government has earmarked £27.4bn until 2025 for road building and upgrades. By comparison, electrifying every kilometre of railway would cost around £15bn in total. Subtract a saving of £5bn a year once road-building programmes have been scrapped.
Shortfalls in social security areĀ ruining the lives of millions. The Ā£20 universal credit upliftĀ cost Ā£9bn across 18 months. Restoring it would need Ā£6bn a year. I donāt yet have a single figure for the total benefits lost by people with disabilities, but itās unlikely to be less than Ā£2bn a year.
Local authorities are facing anĀ annual deficit of Ā£3.5 bn. In central government, thereās a massive backlog processing everything from asylum claims toĀ grants of probate. The policing of fraud and other white-collar crime hasĀ all but evaporated. Throw in another Ā£2bn a year.
While this catalogue isnāt comprehensive, it amounts to a conservative Ā£65bn a year. This, very roughly, is the difference between continued, predatory chaos and a functional, inclusive country. Once items such as shortfalls in NHS grants to the devolved parliaments are added, and other gaps and errors are corrected, it could rise. We could be looking at Ā£100bn.
Either way, itās a ton of money, but is it impossible? No. The current budget is £1.2tn. During the bank bailout, the government issued Ā£124bn inĀ loans and share purchases. It spent between Ā£310bn and Ā£410bnĀ across two yearsĀ on the pandemic. Tens of billions were squandered on corrupt contracts, fraudulent support claims and such failures as Nightingale hospitals and test and trace. The fact that this spending did not cause an economic crisis (though some elements were inflationary) is a partial vindication ofĀ modern monetary theory, which states that the government does not have to raise all the money it spends. And Ā£100bn costs a lot less than state failure.
The obstacles are not economic, but political. We need a government that seeks to improve our lives rather than to save an abstraction called money. Throughout the neoliberal era, the people have served the money. Let the money serve the people.
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate
