Dally wrote:
....and probably little to do with public spending cuts.
You don't half write some rubbish at times. When a government stops spending it has a huge effect on the economy. Period.
It was only last week it was on the radio that we were in fact likely to avoid a double dip recession because the panic buying of fuel induced by the government had increased economic activity sufficiently to keep the growth figure positive!
I thought then I couldn't believe my ears that they needed this "false" demand in the economy to keep things positive and would no doubt be singing the news from the hills that they had avoided the double dip as a result. As the BBC article points out the extra fuel buying is not in these figures so if they were relying on this false demand in the domestic economy to keep things positive it stands to reason it there wasn't enough demand in the domestic economy without it to avoid a recession. Why is domestic economic activity so weak that it needs panic fuel buying to keep it out of recession? Because things like the construction industry are in recession (as the figures show) and they rely heavily on government contracts.
Demand will weaken further as government policy on benefit cuts come in to force this month and with more job cuts to come.
The idea public spending cuts have not contributed to these figures in a big was is ridiculous.