Tag: Is the Bank of England’s QT policy harming the UK economy?

The OBR Problem: How Flawed Forecasts Dictate UK Cost of Living and Business Risk

This analysis critiques the UK’s reliance on OBR fiscal forecasts, arguing that it creates unaccountable economic policy and business uncertainty. We explore the risks of governing by five-year predictions and propose alternative models for a more stable and democratically accountable fiscal framework, empowering UK citizens and businesses to set their own destiny.

OBR Forecasts and Fiscal Rules: A Flawed System for UK Economic Policy?

The Problem with Forecasting Dependency in UK Fiscal Policy

The UK’s fiscal framework operates on a paradoxical foundation. We base binding five-year fiscal rules on Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasts that struggle to accurately predict economic outcomes just twelve months ahead. This creates a system where unaccountable economic policy dictates business conditions and living standards through increasingly speculative longer-term projections.

The core issue isn’t the OBR’s technical competence—it’s the structural flaw of building rigid fiscal rules on inevitably imperfect predictions. When even the OBR acknowledges its central forecasts have “virtually no chance of being correct,” constructing national economic strategy around these numbers represents a fundamental governance failure that undermines both democratic accountability and economic stability.

How OBR Forecasting Creates Business Uncertainty

The Volatility of Forecast-Led Policy Making

Businesses face constant uncertainty from a system that reacts to forecast revisions rather than economic fundamentals. The bi-annual budget cycle creates policy instability as taxes and spending adjustments are made to hit moving targets based on numbers that will likely be revised in the next forecast.

The Accountability Deficit in Economic Governance

When policies are presented as necessary responses to OBR forecasts, elected politicians gain convenient insulation from difficult decisions. This democratic deficit means voters cannot properly hold decision-makers accountable for tax and spending choices that fundamentally shape their economic lives.

A Better Framework for UK Fiscal Responsibility

Moving Beyond Point Forecasts to Scenario Planning

A more robust approach would replace dependency on single-point forecasts with mandatory scenario analysis. Government fiscal plans should demonstrate resilience across multiple plausible economic pathways—including downside risks and upside potential—rather than optimising for one central scenario that will almost certainly prove wrong.

Reforming the Budget Process for Economic Stability

Eliminating the two-main-fiscal-events-per-year cycle would reduce policy volatility and discourage short-term manipulation of forecasts. A single annual budget would force longer-term thinking and create a more predictable environment for business investment and household planning.

Taking Control of Britain’s Economic Destiny

Addressing Root Causes Rather Than Symptoms

The current approach to cost-of-living pressures focuses primarily on income-based solutions through benefits and tax adjustments. A more sustainable strategy would tackle structural inflation drivers through supply-side reforms in housing, energy, and regulation that directly lower costs rather than merely redistributing them.

Restoring Democratic Accountability to Economic Policy

Ultimately, the solution lies in re-establishing clear lines of political responsibility for economic outcomes. By focusing on policy levers within direct government control—rather than forecast technicalities—we can create a system where voters can clearly judge their representatives on tangible economic results.

Discover better risk management insights for your business. Connect with our community of enterprise risk leaders today.

Get help to protect and grow your business faster with less uncertainty with BusinessRiskTV

Find out more about growing your business faster here

Subscribe for free business risk management ideas risk reviews and cost reduction ideas

Connect with us for free business risk management tips 

Read more business risk management articles and view videos for free

Connect with us for free alerts to new business risk management articles and view videos 

Business Risk Analysis: The Perils of OBR-Led Fiscal Policy

This critique highlights a fundamental risk for businesses and consumers in the UK: the subordination of long-term fiscal policy to specific, short-term economic forecasts produced by a non-elected body, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). From a risk management perspective, this creates a system plagued by volatility, a lack of accountability, and strategic misalignment.

Core Risk Assessment

The current framework introduces several critical risks to the business environment:

  1. Forecast Reliance Risk: Basing binding fiscal rules on precise 5-year forecasts is to build a strategy on inherently unstable ground. The OBR itself is transparent about the immense uncertainty in its projections. For instance, its own fan charts show that a forecast for borrowing in 2028-29 has a near-zero probability of being correct. For a business, this is akin to making a 5-year investment decision based entirely on a single, highly speculative market prediction. The risk is that government policy—and therefore the business environment—is constantly adjusting to what are essentially “best guesses.”
  2. Political Accountability Risk: The “accountability gap.” When fiscal policy is presented as a necessary response to the OBR’s forecast, elected politicians can abdicate responsibility for tough choices. They can claim their hands are tied by the numbers, effectively shielding themselves from direct voter accountability for tax and spending decisions. This undermines democratic oversight and makes it difficult for the electorate to “hold politicians to account,” as you state.
  3. Policy Volatility Risk: The bi-annual forecast cycle (Spring Statement, Autumn Budget) creates a “stop-start” policy environment. Businesses face the risk of sudden tax changes or spending announcements designed to manipulate a specific forecast metric for the next 5-year window. This prevents the long-term stability and predictability that businesses need to invest, hire, and grow with confidence.

A Better Way: A More Resilient and Accountable Framework

A superior risk management approach would shift the system away from its dependence on precise forecasts and toward a more transparent, stable, and outcome-oriented model. Here are the key components of a better way:

1. Shift from Point Forecasts to Scenario Planning
Instead of tethering fiscal rules to a single, inevitably incorrect number, the government should be required to present its fiscal plans against a range of plausible economic scenarios. This would include:

  • A downside scenario (e.g., recession, higher inflation).
  • A central scenario (the current forecast).
  • An upside scenario (stronger growth, lower borrowing costs).

Policies would then be designed to be resilient across these ranges. This forces a conversation about contingency plans and buffers, much like a prudent business would do, rather than betting the entire national strategy on one outcome.

2. Reform the Budgetary Process for Stability
A significant step would be to move to a single, comprehensive annual budget. This would end the disruptive cycle of two major fiscal events per year and discourage the short-term tinkering designed to “game” the OBR’s forecasts. This change has been recommended by bodies like the Institute for Government and would provide a more stable platform for business planning.

3. Focus on Controlling the Cost of Living, Not Just Incomes
Currently, the government’s primary tool for managing the cost of living is “income-based”—using benefits, tax credits, and subsidies to top up household incomes. This often leads to higher government spending and debt.

A more sustainable, “cost-based” approach would empower people to “set our own destiny” by tackling the root causes of high prices through supply-side reforms. This includes:

  • Housing: Radical reform of the planning system to significantly increase the supply of housing, which would directly lower the single biggest cost for most households.
  • Energy: Streamlining regulations to encourage investment in diverse and secure energy sources.
  • Childcare and Social Care: Reforming regulations to increase supply and competition in these sectors.

The success of these policies is measurable in tangible outcomes—more houses built, lower energy bills, more affordable childcare—that voters can clearly see and for which they can hold their elected representatives directly responsible.

Conclusion

The current over-reliance on OBR forecasts creates a brittle and unaccountable fiscal policy framework. It transfers significant business risk from the government’s balance sheet to the private sector in the form of volatility and uncertainty.

A better path involves embracing uncertainty through scenario-based planning, stabilising the policy cycle, and shifting political focus to supply-side reforms that directly lower the cost of living. This would create a more resilient economy, a more predictable business environment, and a system where voters can truly judge their politicians on the tangible outcomes they deliver, restoring a direct line of democratic accountability.

The OBR Problem: How Flawed Forecasts Dictate UK Cost of Living and Business Risk

Bank of England Repo Record: A Red Flag for the UK Economy? | Business Risk TV

The Bank of England’s recent record £87.15 billion repo allotment, a tool used to provide liquidity to banks as the central bank reduces its bond holdings, could signal underlying stress in the UK banking sector. This growing reliance on the central bank for funds raises a red flag for the financial stability and economic safety of the UK. Discover what this means for the wider economy and learn six crucial risk management strategies every business leader should implement now to protect and grow their enterprise more resiliently in an uncertain economic climate.

Bank of England Allots Record £87.15 Billion in Repo Operation: What It Means for UK Business Risk

The Bank of England’s Record Repo Allotment: A Warning for UK Business? 🚨

The Bank of England recently allotted a record £87.15 billion in a short-term repo operation, a move that provides a substantial injection of liquidity into the UK’s banking system. While this may seem like a routine technical adjustment by the central bank, the increasing reliance on these operations could be a significant red flag for the safety of the UK’s financial system and wider economy.

What Is a Repo Operation and Why Is This a Red Flag?

A repo (repurchase agreement) is essentially a short-term loan. The Bank of England lends money to commercial banks and in return, the banks provide high-quality assets (like government bonds) as collateral. The Bank’s increasing use of this tool is directly linked to its Quantitative Tightening (QT) programme, which involves selling off the government bonds it bought during the era of Quantitative Easing (QE). The purpose of these repo operations is to prevent a potential liquidity squeeze in the financial system as the central bank reduces its balance sheet.

The record allotment is a red flag for a few key reasons:

  • Growing Illiquidity: The fact that banks are demanding a record amount of funds from the central bank suggests they may be struggling to find liquidity elsewhere in the market. This could indicate underlying stress in the banking sector and a reluctance among banks to lend to each other.
  • Systemic Risk: This reliance on the Bank of England for funding could be a sign of increased systemic risk. If a major bank were to face a sudden liquidity crisis, the central bank would be its lender of last resort. The increasing size of these operations shows the potential scale of that reliance.
  • Uncertainty and Instability: A record-breaking allotment, particularly one that exceeds a recent record, creates a narrative of growing instability. This can erode confidence in the banking system and the wider economy, making businesses and investors more hesitant to spend and invest. This uncertainty trickles down to businesses and consumers, affecting everything from investment decisions to household spending.

6 Risk Management Measures for Businesses

In an environment of economic uncertainty, business leaders must be proactive to protect their organisations. Here are six essential risk management measures to enhance resilience:

  1. Strengthen Cash Flow and Liquidity: Cash is king, especially in a downturn. Focus on optimising your working capital by accelerating accounts receivable, negotiating longer payment terms with suppliers, and maintaining a healthy cash reserve. Create detailed cash flow forecasts to anticipate potential shortfalls and manage expenses.
  2. Diversify Revenue Streams and Supply Chains: Over-reliance on a single product, service, customer, or supplier is a major vulnerability. Actively seek new markets, customer segments, and partnerships. For your supply chain, identify alternative vendors and consider strategies like near-shoring or holding a small buffer of critical inventory to mitigate potential disruptions.
  3. Conduct Scenario Planning and Stress Testing: Don’t wait for a crisis to hit. Create multiple worst-case, best-case, and most-likely scenarios for your business. For each scenario, outline the potential impact on revenue, costs, and profit. This will help you identify weak points and develop contingency plans in advance.
  4. Manage Debt and Capital Expenditure Wisely: During uncertain times, it is crucial to avoid taking on excessive debt. Evaluate all major capital expenditure projects. Postpone or cancel non-essential investments that don’t directly contribute to immediate revenue or operational efficiency.
  5. Review and Optimise Operational Costs: Take a hard look at all business expenses. Eliminate unnecessary costs without sacrificing the quality of your product or service. This could involve renegotiating contracts, leveraging technology for greater efficiency, or consolidating services. The goal is to create a leaner, more resilient cost structure.
  6. Prioritise Customer and Employee Retention: In a tough economic climate, your most valuable assets are your loyal customers and skilled employees. Focus on providing exceptional customer service to retain your existing client base. For employees, transparent communication and a supportive work environment can boost morale and productivity, reducing the risk of losing key talent.

#UKBusinessRisk #BoE #RepoOperation #BusinessRiskTV #RiskManagement

Get help to protect and grow your business resiliently with BusinessRiskTV

Find out more about business protection and growth in UK

Subscribe for free business risk management ideas reviews and cost reduction tips

Connect with us for free business risk management tips

Why the Bank of England’s Record Repo Allotment Is a Red Flag

The Bank of England’s record-breaking repo allotment is a significant red flag because it points to potential underlying stress and growing liquidity issues within the UK banking system. While repo operations are a standard tool for central banks to manage monetary policy, the increasing size of these allotments, especially in the context of the central bank’s quantitative tightening (QT) programme, reveals a deeper problem.

  • Growing Illiquidity and Inter-bank Distrust: The primary role of a central bank’s repo operation is to provide liquidity. A record amount being requested by commercial banks suggests they are struggling to secure the funds they need from each other. In a healthy banking system, banks would lend to one another in the inter-bank market. The fact that they are turning to the Bank of England in such high volumes could indicate a breakdown of trust between financial institutions, which is a classic symptom of a stressed system.
  • Systemic Risk: The increasing reliance on the central bank for funding raises concerns about systemic risk. Systemic risk is the risk of a collapse of an entire financial system due to the failure of one or more institutions. If a significant portion of the banking sector is dependent on the Bank of England for liquidity, a sudden shock or disruption could have a cascading effect across the entire system. This over-reliance makes the financial system less resilient and more vulnerable to unforeseen events.
  • Uncertainty and Economic Instability: A record repo allotment creates a sense of uncertainty and instability in the market. The public and investors may interpret this as a signal that the banking system is not as robust as it appears. This loss of confidence can have a tangible impact on the wider economy. It can lead to a tightening of lending standards, making it harder for businesses and households to access credit, and it can also deter investment, ultimately slowing down economic growth. The large allotment, therefore, isn’t just a technical exercise; it’s a barometer of growing financial vulnerability in the UK.

Read more free business risk management articles and view videos

Connect with us for free business risk management analysis alerts

6 Essential Business Risk Management Measures for UK Business Leaders

In today’s complex and uncertain economic environment, proactive business risk management is no longer an option—it’s a necessity. UK business leaders must move beyond a reactive approach and build genuine resilience into the core of their operations. Here are six essential measures to take action on now.

1. Strengthen Cash Flow and Liquidity

Cash is the lifeblood of any business. In times of economic instability, a strong cash position can be the difference between survival and failure.

  • Optimise working capital: Focus on accelerating accounts receivable by offering incentives for early payment or enforcing stricter payment terms. At the same time, negotiate more favourable payment terms with your suppliers to extend your accounts payable.
  • Create robust cash flow forecasts: Use financial modelling and scenario planning to predict potential cash shortfalls. This will help you anticipate problems and give you time to secure financing or make cost adjustments before a crisis hits.
  • Maintain a cash reserve: Aim to build a buffer of cash sufficient to cover at least three to six months of operating expenses. This reserve acts as a critical safety net against unexpected disruptions.

2. Diversify Revenue Streams and Supply Chains

Over-reliance on a single customer, product, or supplier is a major vulnerability. Diversification builds a more robust and flexible business model.

3. Conduct Scenario Planning and Stress Testing

Don’t wait for a crisis to expose your weaknesses. Proactive scenario planning allows you to test your business model against a range of potential threats.

4. Manage Debt and Capital Expenditure Wisely

High levels of debt can become a significant burden in a tightening credit environment.

  • Limit new borrowing: Be cautious about taking on new debt, particularly for non-essential projects. Evaluate every borrowing decision based on its potential return on investment and its impact on your balance sheet.
  • Re-evaluate capital projects: Postpone or cancel major capital expenditures that are not critical for business operations or do not have a clear and immediate path to profitability. Prioritize investments that enhance operational efficiency and resilience.

5. Review and OPTIMISE Operational Costs

A lean and efficient cost structure improves profitability and allows you to better weather economic storms.

6. Build a Strong Risk Culture

Risk management is not just the responsibility of a single department; it should be a shared mindset across the entire organisation.

Bank Of England Repo Red Flag UK Economy Business Risk Management

UK OBR Forecasts: Why Business Leaders Must Rethink Risk Management Strategy

The UK Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has been widely criticised for its consistently inaccurate economic forecasts over the past decade, particularly its overly optimistic predictions for productivity growth. This inaccuracy is a significant business risk because UK economic policy is heavily reliant on the OBR’s projections, which can lead to abrupt and disruptive policy changes. Businesses can’t change the OBR, but they can improve their risk management by focusing on scenario planning, diversifying operations, strengthening financial controls, and investing in organisational agility to better withstand external shocks and policy shifts.

UK OBR Forecasts: A Decade of Inaccuracy and the Risk for UK Businesses

The UK Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has been criticised for its economic forecasts over the last 10 years, which have often been inaccurate. While it has performed better than the Treasury did before its creation, it has persistently overestimated productivity growth, a key factor in its forecasts. This inaccuracy is a significant concern because UK economic policy, particularly the government’s fiscal rules, is heavily tied to the OBR’s projections.

Accuracy of OBR Forecasts

The OBR was established in 2010 to provide independent and credible economic and fiscal forecasts, preventing the political manipulation that was common when the Treasury produced its own projections. While the OBR has been praised by institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and is considered a successful innovation, its forecasts have been far from perfect. The OBR itself acknowledges that the difference between its forecasts and actual economic outcomes can be significant, especially during periods of economic turbulence.

A major and consistent issue is the OBR’s over-optimistic forecast for productivity growth. This persistent overestimation has a cascading effect on other economic projections. Lower-than-expected productivity means slower wage growth, reduced tax revenues from income and corporation tax, and weaker household spending, which in turn reduces VAT receipts. These factors make it harder for the government to meet its fiscal targets without raising taxes or cutting spending.

The OBR’s Influence on UK Economic Policy

UK economic policy is heavily tied to OBR projections for a few key reasons:

  • Fiscal Rules: The government sets fiscal rules, such as targets for debt and borrowing, which are judged against the OBR’s forecasts. The OBR’s verdict on whether these rules are being met becomes the primary driver of the Chancellor’s Budget and fiscal decisions. This creates a system where a small change in the OBR’s forecast, often called “fiscal headroom,” can lead to significant and often rushed policy adjustments.
  • Credibility: The OBR’s independence is crucial for maintaining the UK’s financial credibility in the eyes of international investors and markets. The infamous “mini-budget” of 2022, which was not accompanied by an OBR forecast, led to a sharp drop in the pound and a rise in government borrowing costs. This event underscored the importance of the OBR’s role in providing market reassurance and preventing politically motivated “wishful thinking” from undermining economic stability.

Alternatives to the OBR’s Dominance

Ditching the OBR’s power over UK economic policy would be a high-risk move, but alternatives could include a more flexible or multi-faceted approach to fiscal policy.

  • Diverse Forecasting Sources: The government could rely on a broader range of economic forecasts from institutions like the Bank of England (BoE), the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), and private sector consultancies. This would provide a more balanced view and reduce the over-reliance on a single body’s projections.
  • Reform of Fiscal Rules: A more desirable alternative might be to reform the fiscal framework itself. The current system, which focuses on a narrow “fiscal space” against a single forecast, leads to frequent and disruptive policy changes. A new framework could focus on a longer-term strategy, such as a medium-term program for fiscal consolidation, rather than a narrow-minded adherence to a specific debt target at a single point in time.

Business Risk Management Strategies

Business leaders in the UK can’t control the OBR’s forecasts, but they can adapt their risk management strategies to mitigate the impact of inaccurate projections and subsequent policy volatility.

  1. Embrace Scenario Planning: Don’t rely on a single economic forecast. Develop and analyse a range of best-case, worst-case, and most-likely scenarios for economic growth, inflation, and interest rates. This allows for a more resilient strategy that can adapt to different economic realities.
  2. Focus on Internal Data: Prioritise your own company’s data and market analysis over public economic forecasts. Monitor your customers, supply chains, and workforce closely. This provides a more accurate picture of the direct risks and opportunities facing your business.
  3. Diversify and Build Resilience: Reduce your reliance on a single market, product, or supplier. A diversified business model, a strong balance sheet, and a resilient supply chain will help you withstand external shocks, regardless of what the OBR is forecasting.
  4. Engage with Policy: Stay informed about potential government policy changes driven by the OBR’s forecasts. Engage with trade associations and professional bodies to have a voice in shaping policy and to anticipate regulatory shifts that could impact your business.
  5. Strengthen Financial Controls: Given the potential for unexpected tax increases or spending cuts, maintain a robust financial management system. This includes managing cash flow, hedging against currency fluctuations, and securing credit lines to provide a buffer against economic volatility.
  6. Invest in Agility: Foster a culture of agility and rapid response within your organisation. This allows you to quickly pivot your strategy, adjust pricing, or change operational models in response to sudden policy changes or economic shifts. This proactive approach minimises the time lag between an external shock and your company’s response.

#BusinessRisk #UKEconomy #RiskManagement #BusinessRiskTV

Get help to protect and grow your business faster with BusinessRiskTV

Find out more about protecting and growing your business 

Subscribe for free business risk management ideas risk reviews and cost reduction tips

Connect with us for free business risk management tips

The Problem with Over-Optimistic OBR Predictions

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has a track record of being overly optimistic in its economic forecasts, particularly concerning a few key metrics. This persistent overestimation isn’t a minor issue; it has a significant knock-on effect on the government’s fiscal decisions and, by extension, the entire UK economy.

The most glaring and consistent error is the overestimation of productivity growth. Productivity, defined as the output per hour worked, is the fundamental driver of long-term economic growth. When the OBR predicts that productivity will rise faster than it actually does, it creates a cascade of false expectations.

Here’s how this over-optimism creates a problem:

  • Inflated Tax Revenue Projections: Higher productivity is expected to lead to higher wages and company profits. The OBR’s models, therefore, forecast larger tax receipts from income tax, corporation tax, and National Insurance. When productivity growth falls short, these tax revenues also underperform, creating a fiscal black hole.
  • Misleading “Fiscal Headroom”: The difference between the government’s borrowing target and the OBR’s forecast for borrowing is known as “fiscal headroom.” When the OBR is overly optimistic, this headroom appears larger than it is in reality. This can tempt Chancellors to make unfunded spending pledges or tax cuts, only to discover later that the money isn’t there, forcing a difficult U-turn or a “mini-budget” style crisis.
  • Policy Instability: The OBR’s forecasts are a major input for government fiscal rules. When these forecasts prove inaccurate, it leads to a cycle of constant policy adjustments. This creates an unstable and unpredictable economic environment for businesses, making long-term planning difficult and discouraging investment.

Why UK Economic Policy is Trapped by OBR Projections

The OBR was created in 2010 to depoliticise economic forecasting and provide independent, credible analysis for the government. In many ways, it has succeeded, preventing the return to a system where the Treasury could be accused of creating politically convenient, but unrealistic, numbers. However, this success has created an almost unbreakable link between the OBR’s forecasts and the government’s fiscal policy.

This dependency is best understood through the UK’s system of fiscal rules. Governments set themselves targets for debt and borrowing, and these targets are formally judged against the OBR’s forecasts. The OBR’s assessment of whether a government is “on track” to meet its own rules becomes the single most important factor shaping fiscal policy.

Here’s why this creates a trap:

  • The “Fiscal Headroom” Squeeze: Chancellors of the Exchequer are in a constant battle to meet their fiscal targets, often by a razor-thin margin. The OBR’s forecasts for the economy—especially for productivity and growth—determine how much “fiscal headroom” (the buffer between current policy and the fiscal rules) the government has. A minor downgrade in the OBR’s forecast, often costing just a few billion pounds, can be enough to wipe out this headroom, forcing the Chancellor to scramble for new tax rises or spending cuts to stay compliant.
  • A Focus on the Short Term: The cycle of semi-annual OBR forecasts encourages a short-term, reactive approach to policymaking. Instead of developing a long-term, strategic vision for the economy, the government’s focus is on making the numbers “add up” for the next OBR report. This can lead to rushed, poorly thought-out decisions that prioritize meeting a forecast over sound long-term economic planning.
  • The Political Consequences of Defiance: The 2022 “mini-budget” provides a stark example of what happens when a government tries to sidestep the OBR. The lack of an independent forecast to accompany the radical tax-cutting agenda spooked financial markets, leading to a collapse in the pound and a sharp rise in government borrowing costs. This event cemented the OBR’s power, showing that its credibility is crucial for maintaining market confidence.

Ultimately, while the OBR provides a valuable service by preventing political manipulation, its central role in the fiscal framework makes the UK economy highly vulnerable to its forecasts. Businesses and individuals are left to navigate the consequences of a system where a single set of numbers can dictate major policy changes, from tax hikes to cuts in public services.

Alternatives to the OBR: A New Path for UK Fiscal Policy?

The UK’s reliance on the OBR’s single set of forecasts for its fiscal rules has created a system that is brittle and prone to sudden, reactive policy changes. Many economists and think tanks, including the Institute for Government and the New Economics Foundation, argue that a more robust and flexible framework is needed. This would not mean getting rid of the OBR entirely, but rather changing its role and the rules it judges the government against.

Instead of the current system, a new path could include:

  • A “Strategy-First” Approach: The government would first articulate its long-term fiscal strategy, outlining its objectives for spending, taxation, and debt over a 10- or 20-year horizon. The OBR’s role would then shift from simply validating the numbers to providing an independent assessment of whether the government’s policies are consistent with that stated strategy. This would encourage a focus on the bigger picture rather than short-term compliance.
  • Multiple Forecasts and Broader Scrutiny: The government could be required to publish its own internal forecasts alongside the OBR’s. Additionally, a new, independent body—perhaps a “Fiscal Policy Committee” similar to the Monetary Policy Committee at the Bank of England—could be introduced. This committee would review both the Treasury’s and the OBR’s forecasts, fostering a more open debate and allowing for a greater degree of professional judgment.
  • Reforming the Fiscal Rules Themselves: The rules could be made more flexible to account for economic shocks. For example, rather than a rigid target for debt to fall in a specific year, the rules could focus on a rolling, long-term trend. This would give the government more breathing room to respond to a recession or other unexpected events without being forced into immediate, and potentially damaging, tax hikes or spending cuts. Another alternative is to move beyond just targeting debt and borrowing and instead focus on a broader measure of the government’s balance sheet, including public sector assets.

These alternatives aim to replace the current system’s reliance on a single, fallible forecast with a framework that is more resilient, transparent, and focused on genuine long-term fiscal sustainability.

Read more free business risk management articles and view videos

Connect with us for free new business risk management alerts

Six Ways to OBR-Proof Your Business Risk Management

The unpredictability of UK economic policy, largely driven by the OBR’s frequently inaccurate forecasts, is a strategic risk that business leaders cannot ignore. While you can’t control the government’s fiscal decisions, you can build a more resilient and adaptable business model that is less vulnerable to these external shocks. Here are six actionable ways to OBR-proof your risk management strategy:

  1. Embrace Scenario Planning, Not Single Forecasts: Ditch the habit of basing your entire business plan on a single, optimistic economic forecast. Instead, develop a range of plausible scenarios. What happens if the OBR cuts its productivity forecast? What if inflation stays stubbornly high, forcing the Bank of England to keep interest rates elevated? Create financial models for best-case, worst-case, and most-likely scenarios, and have clear contingency plans for each. This allows you to react quickly and confidently when the economic winds shift.
  2. Focus on Your Own Data as the “Truth”: Public economic data can be noisy and subject to revision. While it provides context, the most reliable information for your business is your own data. Prioritise your internal metrics: customer buying habits, sales trends, inventory turnover, and supply chain performance. Use this real-time, granular data to make strategic decisions rather than waiting for the next OBR report. This internal focus makes your business more agile and responsive to the realities on the ground.
  3. Build Financial Buffers and Flexible Budgets: In an environment of potential fiscal instability, cash is king. Maintain healthy cash reserves and establish strong relationships with banks to secure flexible lines of credit. Move away from rigid annual budgets towards a system of rolling forecasts that are reviewed and updated on a monthly or quarterly basis. This flexibility allows you to adjust spending, investment, and hiring plans in response to the latest economic signals, rather than being locked into an outdated plan.
  4. Strengthen and Diversify Your Supply Chain: A single, fragile supply chain is a significant vulnerability. OBR-driven policy shifts can lead to unexpected tariffs, regulatory changes, or even a sudden drop in domestic demand that impacts your suppliers. Actively work to diversify your suppliers, both geographically and in terms of the companies you work with. Building multiple supplier relationships and having contingency plans in place can insulate your operations from external shocks.
  5. Invest in Agility and Cross-Training: The ability to pivot your business model is a critical form of resilience. Invest in technology and employee training that allows your workforce to be more flexible and adaptable. Cross-training employees to perform multiple roles, embracing automation for routine tasks, and having a clear communication plan for times of crisis can help your business respond effectively to sudden changes in consumer demand or government regulation.
  6. Actively Engage with Policy and External Expertise: While you can’t control policy, you can be better prepared for it. Stay informed about the government’s fiscal plans and the OBR’s commentary. Join trade associations or professional bodies that have a voice in shaping policy. Consider working with external strategic advisors who can provide an objective, expert perspective on the risks and opportunities presented by the UK’s economic and political landscape. This proactive engagement can help you anticipate regulatory changes and position your business to thrive in a volatile environment

UK OBR Forecasts: A Decade of Inaccuracy and the Risk for UK Businesses

Bank of England Quantitative Tightening Impact on UK Government Borrowing Costs 2025

Impact of Bank of England QT on UK business investment and growth

The Bank of England, in its misguided pursuit of inflation control, is inflicting significant self-harm upon the UK economy. Their weapon of choice? Quantitative Tightening (QT), a policy that involves the central bank actively selling off government bonds from its balance sheet. This seemingly technical manoeuvre has far-reaching consequences, directly impacting the cost of government borrowing and indirectly squeezing businesses and households.

The Bank of England’s Self-Inflicted Wound: How Quantitative Tightening is Crushing the UK Economy

Think of it like this: Imagine you’re trying to sell your house. Suddenly, a large institutional investor floods the market with similar properties. This oversupply inevitably drives down the price of your home. Similarly, the Bank of England’s aggressive bond sales are overwhelming the market, depressing the price of newly issued government bonds (falling bond prices = higher bond yields = higher cost of government borrowing = higher cost business and consumer borrowing = slower economic growth = higher unemployment and falling living standards).

Lower bond prices translate directly into higher yields. This means the government now has to pay significantly more interest on its debt. This increased borrowing cost has a domino effect. It forces the government to make tough choices, often leading to cuts in public services, impacting everything from healthcare and education to infrastructure projects.

But the pain doesn’t stop there. Higher government borrowing costs inevitably filter down to businesses and consumers. Banks, facing increased borrowing costs themselves, pass these expenses onto businesses through higher lending rates. This stifles investment, slows economic growth, and ultimately leads to job losses. Consumers also feel the pinch through higher mortgage rates and increased borrowing costs for everyday expenses.

The irony is that the Bank of England’s actions are exacerbating the very problem they are trying to solve. By raising borrowing costs and hindering economic growth, they are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of higher inflation.

The Solution Lies in Stopping QT

The good news is that the solution is relatively straightforward: the Bank of England must immediately halt its QT programme. This would stabilise the bond market, reduce borrowing costs for the government, and ease the pressure on businesses and households.

Imagine a patient suffering from a self-inflicted wound. The first step towards recovery is to stop the bleeding. In this case, stopping QT is akin to staunching the flow of bonds into the market. This would allow the market to stabilise, prices to rebound, and borrowing costs to decrease.

Why is the Bank of England Doing This?

One might wonder why the Bank of England is pursuing this self-destructive path. The answer lies in their singular focus on inflation. While inflation is a serious concern, their current approach is akin to treating a fever with a sledgehammer. They are prioritising short-term pain over long-term economic health.

The Government Has the Power to Intervene

It’s crucial to understand that the government ultimately has the authority to direct the Bank of England’s actions. While the Bank of England operates with a degree of independence, its mandate is ultimately derived from the government.

The government has the power, and indeed the responsibility, to instruct the Bank of England to halt its QT programme. This is not an unprecedented move. Governments routinely intervene in the actions of central banks when the economic consequences of their policies become untenable.

A Political Decision with Real Consequences

The decision to allow the Bank of England to continue its QT programme is not merely a technical one; it is a deeply political choice. The government, by choosing inaction, is effectively choosing to allow the Bank of England to cripple the UK economy.

The consequences of this inaction are severe. We are talking about real people facing real hardships: families struggling to pay their mortgages, businesses teetering on the brink of collapse, and vital public services facing devastating cuts.

This is not about bureaucratic infighting; it’s about the well-being of the nation. The government must step in, assert its authority, and instruct the Bank of England to halt its QT programme.

Avoiding Austerity and Supporting Growth

By stopping QT, the government can prevent a further deterioration of the economic situation. This will allow businesses to thrive, create jobs, and boost economic growth. It will also free up much-needed resources for public services, ensuring that our healthcare system, education system, and other vital institutions can continue to function effectively.

The Bottom Line

The Bank of England’s QT programme is a self-inflicted wound that is threatening to cripple the UK economy. The government must act decisively to stop this destructive path. By instructing the Bank of England to halt its bond sales, the government can stabilise the market, reduce borrowing costs, and pave the way for a more prosperous future.

This is not about interfering with the independence of the Bank of England; it’s about protecting the interests of the British people. The government must not allow bureaucrats to crash the economy. The time for action is now.

Disclaimer: This article presents an opinion on the potential economic impacts of the Bank of England’s QT policy. It is not intended as financial advice. This article aims to provide a concise and engaging analysis of the Bank of England’s QT policy and its potential consequences for the UK economy. By highlighting the potential benefits of halting QT and emphasising the government’s role in guiding monetary policy, this article seeks to inform and influence the ongoing debate surrounding the UK’s economic future.

Get help to protect and grow your business faster

Find out more about Business Risk Management Club Corporate Membership 

Subscribe for free business risk management tips reviews and cost reduction ideas

Connect with us for free

Read more business risk management articles and watch videos for free

Connect with us for free

Enterprise Risk Management Magazine Article
Impact Of QT On Your Business and Life UK

Read and watch more risk analysis :

  1. Bank of England Quantitative Tightening Impact on UK Government Borrowing Costs 2025 – the link between QT and increased government borrowing costs.

  2. How does Bank of England QT policy affect UK public services – a key consequence of increased borrowing costs, relevant to readers concerned about the impact on public services.

  3. Is the Bank of England’s QT policy harming the UK economy? – for those interested in the economic implications of QT.

  4. Should the UK government intervene in Bank of England’s QT policy? – the government’s role in influencing monetary policy.

  5. Impact of Bank of England QT on UK business investment and growth – businesses and investors who are concerned about the economic impact of QT on their operations.

Relevant hashtags :

  1. #BoEQT
  2. #UKEconomy
  3. #CostOfLivingCrisisUK
  4. #PublicSpendingCuts
  5. #UKPolitics
  6. #BusinessRiskTV
  7. #ProRiskManager
  8. #RiskManagement

Pro-tips For Risk Owners

Bank of England Quantitative Tightening Impact on UK Government Borrowing Costs 2025