To continue the argument from social media.... surely the problem is the fiscal rules not the forecasts or who does them? The reason decisions have got worse is not the OBR appearing but much harder economic conditions plus increasing dumb fiscal rules (and bad ideology).
Your position seems to be that there is a virtue to allowing essentially doctored forecasts because they might allow governments to pretend their following rules when they're not and thus stick to a coherent plan? But that surely just makes the whole thing murkier and risks another Truss-style problem?
Fair points. I think my view is that I don't make a sharp distinction between rules, models and forecasts (see posts passim) - I think they're different rhetorical styles that people use to talk about the overall regulatory system. So it's a matter of good decisions and bad decisions - if something is the right thing to do, then it doesn't make it better if it's also following a rule or worse if it's not. (Even "don't borrow for consumption" has a very recent counterexample!).
So I think the murkiness is intrinsic to the territory - this is economic policy, it's not easy! - and any attempt to make it transparent or clear is likely to involve sweeping a whole load of stuff under the carpet. And I don't think we can get rid of the risk of Truss-like budgets; but it's noticeable to me that in this case, the overall regulatory system worked a treat, she was out of office within a fortnight, and the market dislocation was contained.
To continue the argument from social media.... surely the problem is the fiscal rules not the forecasts or who does them? The reason decisions have got worse is not the OBR appearing but much harder economic conditions plus increasing dumb fiscal rules (and bad ideology).
Your position seems to be that there is a virtue to allowing essentially doctored forecasts because they might allow governments to pretend their following rules when they're not and thus stick to a coherent plan? But that surely just makes the whole thing murkier and risks another Truss-style problem?
Fair points. I think my view is that I don't make a sharp distinction between rules, models and forecasts (see posts passim) - I think they're different rhetorical styles that people use to talk about the overall regulatory system. So it's a matter of good decisions and bad decisions - if something is the right thing to do, then it doesn't make it better if it's also following a rule or worse if it's not. (Even "don't borrow for consumption" has a very recent counterexample!).
So I think the murkiness is intrinsic to the territory - this is economic policy, it's not easy! - and any attempt to make it transparent or clear is likely to involve sweeping a whole load of stuff under the carpet. And I don't think we can get rid of the risk of Truss-like budgets; but it's noticeable to me that in this case, the overall regulatory system worked a treat, she was out of office within a fortnight, and the market dislocation was contained.
Something about man, and the Sabbath?