The Guardian view on Rachel Reeves’s spending cuts: a choice, not an economic necessity | Editorial

The spring statement casts austerity as unavoidable, but Labour is clinging to economic myths while ignoring the tools of power

The chancellor's spring statement arrives with the sombre tone of inevitability. Britain, we're told, must tighten its belt. Welfare payments for the sick and disabled will be shrunk. Public services from transport to criminal justice face leaner times. The language is that of necessity. There is no money. The choices are hard, but unavoidable. So runs the script.

The idea that painful cuts are inevitable is political theatre. Either Rachel Reeves knows the constraints are self-imposed - or, more troublingly, believes they are real. LastOctober, she announced 190bn in extra spending, 140bn in additional borrowing and 35bn more in taxes than previously forecast. The Treasury view is you can't pour that amount of money into the state and call it austerity".

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.