GEORGE Osborne might have to cut public spending even deeper to pay for £7 billion of uncosted spending commitments, Britain's leading economic think-tank has claimed, confirming living standards will be lower at the end of this parliament in 2015 than they were at the start in 2010.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies also claimed the Chancellor was relying on "uncertain" revenues from a crackdown on tax avoidance and an increase in the bank levy to fund a series of giveaways in this week's Autumn Statement.
Announcements made in the spring Budget, together with Thursday's economic statement, such as not increasing fuel duties, giving free school means to English primary schoolchildren and the marriage tax break, would add an extra £7bn of spending from 2015/16.
Paul Johnson, of the IFS, said: "The Chancellor continues to make specific promises on spending increases while stating that he will keep total spending at the same level. He can't keep doing that.
"While the costs of his tax cuts are pretty definite," he explained, "the benefits from his anti-avoidance measures, and indeed of the increase in the bank levy, are rather less certain."
The IFS also warned that Mr Osborne's plans to return the budget to surplus by 2018/19 implied further hefty cuts to public services over the next five years.
Last night, Labour's Chris Leslie said: "The independent verdict from the IFS is that people will be substantially worse off after five years under David Cameron.
"That's why George Osborne's Autumn Statement has failed millions of ordinary people across Britain. It had no plan to tackle the cost-of-living crisis and earn our way to higher living standards for the many and not just a few."
The Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury said the think-tank had confirmed real wages were £1600-a-year lower than in May 2010 and that incomes would be substantially lower at the end of this Parliament than at the start.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article