I joined Mike Graham on The Mike Graham Show again this week, and with Britain’s national debt passing £3 trillion, inflation rising and the Budget approaching, we certainly weren’t short of things to talk about.
I’ve already covered the latest borrowing figures and inflation figures in detail here on Stat of the Nation. So rather than repeat all the statistics, I thought I’d share our conversation and pick out a few other issues that came up.
🎥 Watch my full conversation with Mike Graham below.
🎖️ Veterans Being Chased for Pension Overpayments
One story Mike raised was the Government pursuing military veterans over pension overpayments caused by administrative errors.
According to parliamentary answers, 335 veterans were overpaid a combined £5.1 million because of incorrect National Insurance calculations. Some have faced substantial repayment demands despite the mistakes not being their own.
Now put that into perspective. The Government is borrowing billions every month, yet veterans who served their country face financial difficulties because of errors made in administering their pensions.
Of course, public money needs to be accounted for. But surely there should be some consideration of responsibility, fairness and the human consequences of recovering these payments?
🔥 North Sea Gas — Apparently a Controversial Idea!
We also discussed the Government’s approval of the Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea, a decision criticised by some Labour MPs over its environmental consequences.
The project is expected to increase domestic gas production by around 6% at its peak, supporting British jobs and reducing some reliance on imports.
I find the debate extraordinary. Britain continues importing gas from overseas, yet producing more from beneath our own waters remains controversial.
That doesn’t mean domestic production insulates us from international gas prices. But surely energy security, British jobs and the economic benefits of domestic production deserve proper consideration too?
🏛️ Would You Employ Labour’s Front Bench?
Perhaps the funniest moment came when I asked Mike a simple question.
Imagine you were running a business and needed somebody to manage part of it. How many members of Labour’s front bench would you trust with the job?
Mike’s answer was immediate: a big round zero!
We had a laugh about it, but there is a serious issue underneath. Ministers oversee departments spending billions of pounds, making decisions that affect businesses, households and taxpayers across the country.
The public is entitled to expect competence, accountability and value for money.
💷 The Bigger Economic Picture
Ultimately, our conversation returned to Britain’s public finances. We are collecting enormous amounts in taxation, but government spending continues to outstrip revenue.
The two big stories behind the discussion were last week’s borrowing and inflation releases. I’ve set out the figures and my analysis in the articles below.
With the Budget approaching, the question remains whether the Government can control spending and deliver growth without repeatedly turning to taxpayers for more money.
What do you think? Does Britain need higher taxes, tighter spending controls, or a complete rethink of its economic priorities?
✍️ Thanks for reading Stat of the Nation. If you find my analysis useful, please share or subscribe to support my work.
I crunch the numbers behind the headlines so you don’t have to.
✍️ Jamie Jenkins
Stats Jamie | Stats, Facts & Opinions
📲 Follow me here for more daily updates:
Great questions posed Jamie.
You know my feelings, we need a working. Monetary system based on SPENDING.
I had a laugh myself yesterday as I had to quote something to my MP that I’d never have thought I’d ever have to do.
I quoted Newtons 3rd law of motion to settle an argument that SPENDING is indeed an action and receiving is a reaction! I did think how ridiculous I felt having to resort to such laws of action and reaction to infirm an MP that a ‘trigger’ is a precursor to the act of SPENDING that is totally separate to receiving money which is a separate act altogether.
As we both know Jamie tax is triggered at the point of money SPENT and not before and paid not received! Money may not be paid but the tax to HMRC falls due at the moment of payment not receipt. Especially in the case of income tax. Where the employer has to pay HMRC the same moment and tax date month is Paid to HMRC and the employer. By the employer. As the employer doesent get it they can’t pay it at that moment, it’s the employer who pays and so it’s triggered by the act of SPENDING on the wages of employers. Not after.
As you know, I assert that it’s SPENDING of money that triggers tax. It has to. Because NOT SPENDING money triggers NO TAX WHATSOEVER!
To be frank Jamie, his inability to truly grasp that is testimony alone to the type of thinking we have at the top of our government.
I do believe he was trying to defend the indefensible of the present governments and those gone before of a tax bring on income. It still is a tax on income but it happens to be triggered prior by the income by the precursor act of SPENDING!
I’m not trying to rewrite anything I just need those tasked with making decisions to realise there is an expert argument to be had. Over the present inability to grasp the bloody obvious!
So I am completely in sympathy with your views on this. Politicians can’t keep misleading because of ignorance!
One thing I get frustrated at is the reference to the ‘magic money tree’!
We know money doesent grow on trees it’s not magic and it’s produced by SPENDING by government from the Consolidated Fund yet those who get it batted to them need to say that in response.
And another gripe is the phrase “we the taxpayers”. You know I have mentioned it in the past.
The truth is we are all taxpayers. The ones who pay less tax pro rata are not the disabled or the unemployable. It’s those who DONT SPEND.
The ones who do SPEND pay taxes.
We know this not just by respecting the views of Newton and Einstein that explained by the 3Rd law of motion. And I don’t think anyone should argue with their views!
But more simply because tax has to be triggered by SPENDING because NOT SPENDING triggers absolutely no tax whatsoever!
So instead of we the taxpayer it should be “we, those who SPEND all our money are the taxpayers” because they are the only ones who Trigger tax and who pass on money to others as we all rely on others to SPEND so we get our money Jamie!
Another really stupid question is “where is the money coming from?”.
This is stupidity personified!
Money comes from the same place it always has gone from. SPENDING!
No one gets money unless someone else SPENDS it.
It originates from the Consolidated Fund. From Government SPENDING. So that is where money comes from!
It’s where it then goes! If it gets withheld unspent. That’s why government SPENDS more than tax take!
Because the missing amount to give surplus is sitting unspent and unused so isn’t returned to government in tax! It’s so bloody obvious yet no one sees it!
I hope this helps you Jamie.
We have to start bringing clear and precise to bat back such idiotic thinking.
We have to be better than they are and stop perpetuating such nonsense as magic money trees!
Great questions posed Jamie.
You know my feelings, we need a working. Monetary system based on SPENDING.
I had a laugh myself yesterday as I had to quote something to my MP that I’d never have thought I’d ever have to do.
I quoted Newtons 3rd law of motion to settle an argument that SPENDING is indeed an action and receiving is a reaction! I did think how ridiculous I felt having to resort to such laws of action and reaction to infirm an MP that a ‘trigger’ is a precursor to the act of SPENDING that is totally separate to receiving money which is a separate act altogether.
As we both know Jamie tax is triggered at the point of money SPENT and not before and paid not received! Money may not be paid but the tax to HMRC falls due at the moment of payment not receipt. Especially in the case of income tax. Where the employer has to pay HMRC the same moment and tax date month is Paid to HMRC and the employer. By the employer. As the employer doesent get it they can’t pay it at that moment, it’s the employer who pays and so it’s triggered by the act of SPENDING on the wages of employers. Not after.
As you know, I assert that it’s SPENDING of money that triggers tax. It has to. Because NOT SPENDING money triggers NO TAX WHATSOEVER!
To be frank Jamie, his inability to truly grasp that is testimony alone to the type of thinking we have at the top of our government.
I do believe he was trying to defend the present governments and those gone before of a tax bring on income. It still is a tax on income but it happens to be triggered prior by the act of SPENDING!
I’m not trying to rewrite anything I just need those tasked with making decisions to realise there is an expert argument to be had. Over the present inability to grasp the bloody obvious!
So I am completely in sympathy with your views on this. Politicians can’t keep misleading because of ignorance!
One thing I get frustrated at is the reference to the ‘magic money tree’!
We know money doesent grow on trees it’s not magic and it’s produced by SPENDING by government from the Consolidated Fund yet those who get it batted to them need to say that!
And another gripe is the phrase “we the taxpayers”. You know I have mentioned it in the past.