Howard - I find it very interesting to see how The Independent chose to interpret this. #18
Here is a link to the report itself:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2012/052212.htm
The Independent seem to be taking points 12 and 13 for their interpretation of fiscal easing. But of course it does not exactly say that. For fiscal easing (which might be interpreted as a slowdown of spending cuts) they actually suggest two things, 'temporary tax cuts' - I agree with the need for tax cuts but permanent ones directed at the 45p rate and corporate taxes as these will do most to help growth and, in the case of the 45p rate, not impact or even boost HMRC income.
The second suggestion is indeed some increased spending if necessary - capital spending that is on infrastructure and in doing so take advantage of the low interest rates from which the government is benefiting from due to their deficit reduction plan. Again I would not argue against that as such. What it is very clear they strongly support, however, is the reductions in current account or revenue spending and it is this which is needed to reduce the deficit, the real elephant in the room.
This is very complex and it is fair to say that you can find something in it for everyone but the important thing is their support and endorsement for the government's deficit reduction strategy which is essential and that is unequivocal.
Peter Marsh.
Sorry just seen you comment, I missed that earlier. First of all yes, the IMF are a bunch of desk based accountants and economists but, at the end of the day they can only comment on the economy as it is and the measures being taken to deal with what are incredibly difficult circumstances. At the end of the day we all need a healthy economy which has been dragged down by some disastrous mismanagement for a decade or more here and in Europe made worse by that mad currency experiment in Europe. Putting it right is difficult for everyone but thing can only improve if it gets done and, sadly, things always get worse before they get better.
You are also right in your reference to those out of work and getting them back into jobs must be a priority - see my blog today as I address that.