好色先生TV

How much will today鈥檚 announcements by the Chancellor George Osborne really change the picture for construction?

Will the promise of jam today, tomorrow and for every day in this parliament really amount to a hill of beans?

Well no.

But if you want to carry on to find out why not, here we go.

I鈥檒l start by trying to get a handle on what the funding gap might be for construction. In fairness its all a bit hypothetical and rests on what is a reasonable aspiration for the fruits of construction.

Anyway by way of a start here鈥檚 a graph which shows construction output up to now with the forecast to 2015.

I have put in a trend line which shows the trend growth from 1975 to 2007 when the credit crunch bit. This is projected forward to suggest a reasonable aspiration for construction output.

As we can see there is a gap, which in today鈥檚 money is about 拢20 billion next year.

Now let鈥檚 think about that forecast from the Construction Products Association and what it means. Its projection doesn鈥檛 include the amount of housing that before the credit crunch we thought to be needed. It doesn鈥檛 include all the huge sums of cash needed to bring the nation鈥檚 infrastructure up to scratch.

To meet those aspirations we would need to spend a further 拢10 billion to 拢15 billion a year on housing and another 拢5 billion to 拢10 billion on infrastructure above the peak levels. So let鈥檚 suggest (not unreasonably if we accept those figures) that we would need to spend a further 拢20 billion above trend to meet the aspirations that seemed reasonable before the downturn.

Add that all together and you have a pretty strong case for suggesting that the funding gap for construction is not far shy of 拢40 billion a year, if we want to meet our not-that-lofty aspirations.

Put that figure out of your mind for a moment. I don鈥檛 want to taint (well not just yet anyway) your enjoyment of the excitement generated before the chancellor鈥檚 speech.

Because today he will release some mouth-wateringly humungous numbers for how much more spending this government is to lever into infrastructure. Numbers so big they will make the public go 鈥渨ow鈥�. Well perhaps that鈥檚 his hope.

But maybe not, as we already know most of what there is in the Autumn Statement from an orchestration of ministerial and private briefings.

There is still some excitement left, we don鈥檛 yet know the name of the rabbit he will pull out of his hat.

Anyway, here鈥檚 what the will be in the sugar coating he鈥檒l be putting on the nasty pill of sick-making economic figures that he will also be releasing:

鈥淭hese include a bid to encourage British pension funds to invest in 拢30bn of infrastructure projects over ten years, a 拢1bn three-year scheme to subsidise work placements for young people, a 拢40bn scheme to underwrite bank loans to small businesses and a mortgage indemnity scheme to boost the housing market.鈥�

That sounds fantastic for construction.

It鈥檚 meant to. But (here I have to dilute your enthusiasm) it basically amounts to a watering down of more ambitious plans laid out over the months that this new administration has been in power.

Let鈥檚 look at what was in the plan October 2010.

Here鈥檚 a cut from the :

鈥淲e plan for UK infrastructure investment to be some 拢200 billion over the next five years. We will help make that happen through smarter use of public funding, improving private sector investment models, encouraging new sources of private capital and addressing the regulatory failures that stand in the way of greater private sector investment in our country鈥檚 infrastructure.鈥�

That鈥檚 拢40 billion a year.

So unless I have my sums badly wrong this Autumn Statement is set to promise 拢3 billion a year or 7.5% of that 拢40 billion. Not that much of a spectacular then.

From a construction perspective, we measure infrastructure slightly different. It doesn鈥檛 include above ground stuff like buildings, it doesn鈥檛 include techie stuff like IT, process plant and equipment. But even so the vast bulk of infrastructure in that widest use of the word boils down to the civil engineering type of infrastructure that is measured in the construction statistics.

Last year we did about 拢20 billion of it when you add the new stuff to the repair and maintenance. That is in volume terms possibly about as much as we have ever done in a year in the UK, the infrastructure statistics not going back too far.

Even against this the 拢3 billion a year over 10 years doesn鈥檛 look that tasty. Certainly we are not in FDR New Deal territory here.

What is more worrying is that the funding, unless I am mistaken, will very much rest on funders in the private sector being willing to pump in the bulk of the investment, with the government underwriting risk.

I鈥檇 better end here, because the structuring of an economy whereby risk is socialised while profits are privatised is a whole other can of worms. And at the moment I don鈥檛 want to be distracted by worms as I ponder on what the name of that rabbit might be.