You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
The national debt is one of the most politically charged topics in economics. Understanding its causes, consequences, and the debate over austerity is essential for A-Level Economics. This lesson examines the UK's experience with national debt, the 2010-2019 austerity programme, and the theoretical arguments around crowding out and Ricardian equivalence.
Key Definition: The national debt (or public sector net debt) is the total accumulated stock of government borrowing over time — the sum of all past budget deficits minus any surpluses. It is distinct from the annual budget deficit, which is a flow.
The UK national debt has fluctuated dramatically over history:
| Period | Debt as % of GDP | Key Cause |
|---|---|---|
| Post-WWII (1945) | ~250% | War expenditure |
| 1990s | ~30% | Long period of growth, privatisation receipts |
| 2007 (pre-crisis) | ~37% | Sustained growth, moderate deficits |
| 2010 (post-crisis) | ~75% | Bank bailouts, fiscal stimulus, automatic stabilisers |
| 2020 (COVID) | ~100% | Furlough scheme, business support, NHS spending |
| 2023 | ~100% | Persistent post-COVID borrowing |
The key insight is that debt as a percentage of GDP matters more than the absolute figure. A country with high GDP can sustain higher absolute debt levels because it has a larger tax base from which to service interest payments.
Exam Tip: Always express national debt as a percentage of GDP, not as an absolute number. Saying "the UK national debt is £2.5 trillion" is less meaningful than saying "UK national debt is approximately 100% of GDP." The percentage allows comparison across countries and over time.
This is a central debate in macroeconomics, and the answer depends significantly on your theoretical perspective.
Interest payments (debt servicing costs): The government must pay interest on outstanding gilts. In 2022-23, UK debt interest payments reached approximately £111 billion — the highest on record — partly due to inflation-linked gilts. Every pound spent on interest is a pound not available for public services.
Burden on future generations: If debt is not repaid, future taxpayers must service it. This constitutes an intergenerational transfer — today's spending is financed by tomorrow's taxes.
Credit rating and borrowing costs: If markets lose confidence in the government's ability to manage its debt, the country's credit rating may be downgraded, raising borrowing costs. The UK lost its AAA credit rating from Moody's in 2013.
Crowding out (see below): Government borrowing may compete with the private sector for limited savings, pushing up interest rates and reducing private investment.
Keynesian view: Keynes (1936) argued that in a recession, increased government borrowing is necessary to offset the fall in private demand. The cost of not borrowing — in terms of lost output, unemployment, and scarring effects — may be far greater than the cost of the debt itself.
Modern Monetary Theory (MMT): Proponents like Stephanie Kelton (2020) argue that a government which issues its own currency (like the UK) can never run out of money in nominal terms. The constraint is not the debt level but inflation — if extra spending pushes the economy beyond full capacity.
Low interest rates: When real interest rates are below the growth rate of the economy (r < g), the debt-to-GDP ratio can fall over time even without primary surpluses. Olivier Blanchard (2019) argued in his AEA presidential address that this condition held for much of recent history.
Who holds the debt: Much UK government debt is held domestically (by UK pension funds, insurance companies, and the Bank of England via QE). The interest payments therefore remain within the UK economy.
Crowding out is a classical/monetarist argument against fiscal expansion. It has two forms:
When the government borrows heavily, it competes with the private sector for funds in the bond market. This increased demand for loanable funds pushes up interest rates. Higher interest rates make private investment more expensive, reducing it. The government spending therefore displaces (crowds out) private sector investment, potentially with no net gain in aggregate demand.
If the economy is already at or near full capacity, increased government spending competes with the private sector for scarce real resources — labour, materials, capital. This bids up factor prices and reduces the output available for private use.
| Argument | Counter-Argument |
|---|---|
| Government borrowing raises interest rates | In a recession with excess savings (liquidity trap), interest rates may not rise — "crowding in" may occur as government spending stimulates private sector confidence |
| Private investment is more efficient than public spending | Some public investment (infrastructure, education) has high social returns that the private sector would not provide |
| Empirical evidence supports crowding out in normal times | Auerbach and Gorodnichenko (2012) found fiscal multipliers are larger in recessions, suggesting crowding out is weaker when there is spare capacity |
Exam Tip: Whether crowding out occurs depends on the state of the economy. Near full employment, crowding out is likely. In a deep recession with spare capacity and low interest rates, it is much less likely. Always make your answer context-dependent.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.