‘Conspiracy Of Silence’ Over Post-Election Budget Challenges, Think Tank Says

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has raised concerns around the proposed funding for state-funded services under the next government, whichever party should win the election.

The IFS has taken aim at what it has long described as a “conspiracy of silence” from both the Conservatives and Labour on how they could meet the challenges they identify, such as reducing NHS waiting lists.

The UK goes to the polls on on 4 July, with all predictions forecasting a Labour Party victory, however, there are, according to polls growing support for other parties like Reform and the Green Party.

With all parties now having released their manifestos the IFS has raised concerns that, despite some promising pledges around areas like social care, the plans for the funding of social services and other publicly funded services have not been thought through sufficiently.

The IFS vehemently criticised the manifestos of both main parties, saying they leave voters “guessing” and casting their ballots in a “knowledge vacuum”, and also accused the Reform UK party and the Greens of “poisoning the debate” around the painful economic decisions ahead with what it described as unattainable pledges on tax.

Paul Johnson, the director of the IFS, said it would be “a considerable surprise if no other taxes are increased over the next five years”, and that none of the main parties are facing up to the difficult choices ahead.

“We’ve called this a conspiracy of silence, and that has been essentially maintained,” he said. “Regardless of who takes office, they will soon face a stark choice: raise taxes by more than they have told us in their manifesto, implement cuts to some areas of spending, or break their fiscal rules and allow debt to rise for longer.

“That is the trilemma. What will they choose? I don’t know; the manifestos do not give us a clue.”

An analysis of the parties’ funding plans can be found here.

Bee Boileau, research economist at IFS and co-author of the report, said: “Both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party have made a lot of their ‘fully funded’ pledges in the manifestos this election campaign. But, in practice, these pledges mean almost nothing for the funding that individual public services might expect in the next parliament.

“We do not know how total spending will be allocated between public services after next March, and, with a few exceptions, neither manifesto offered much light.

“The manifestos did tell us that neither party is planning to top up total public service spending by enough to avoid very difficult choices for many public services in the next parliament.

“But the manifestos provided no information on which areas would actually bear the brunt of these choices, continuing the main parties’ conspiracy of silence when it comes to public service spending plans.”

Mark Franks, director of welfare at the Nuffield Foundation, said: “The public should be informed about whether the parties aiming to form the next government have credible plans for funding the essential public services that people rely on.

“In this election, voters are being asked to make their decision without adequate and clear information on this critical issue. This lack of clarity should be addressed, both in the remaining two weeks before the election and in future electoral processes.”