OECD/IMF talk of « exit strategies » has big risks for workers and families

The annual OECD Ministerial Council meeting in Paris this week expressed concern about the growing public debt associated with stimulus packages in many OECD countries.

Already, the OECD and the IMF are talking about “exit strategies”, which translate into future cutbacks in public expenditure. This is to be linked with the OECD/IMF announcement this week suggesting a slow end to the crisis. In a BBC interview, the IMF’s Chief Economist, said that the US might begin recovery later this year or early in 2010, but that Europe would be behind the US, and unemployment would continue to rise everywhere. But he also talked about public deficits.

At the Plenary of TUAC in Paris this week, trade union colleagues warned that governments, the OECD and the IMF were all developing a line that would mean higher ongoing rates of unemployment and lower social protection for families, well into the foreseeable future. Ironically, the same arguments that set the scene for the crisis are now re-emerging for a post-crisis scenario.

There is also the paradox that the OECD, and even the IMF, talk about protecting education and health spending. But their policies aimed at cutting public spending do precisely the opposite. They end up cutting resources for education and health. We should highlight this paradox in our campaign.