IEA Podcast

In this Institute of Economic Affairs briefing, Communications Manager Reem Ibrahim interviews Dr. Christopher Snowdon, Head of Lifestyle Economics, about the government's consideration of new restrictions on alcohol advertising. The discussion examines why ministers are exploring these plans, potentially to create a "level playing field" with the upcoming junk food advertising ban, and Dr. Snowdon's analysis of why such restrictions would be ineffective and economically damaging. Dr. Snowdon presents comprehensive evidence challenging the effectiveness of alcohol advertising bans, citing Cochrane Reviews and real-world studies that show no meaningful impact on consumption or health outcomes. He explains how advertising primarily affects brand choice and market share rather than overall consumption levels, noting that even substantial increases in advertising spending over recent decades haven't changed drinking patterns. The conversation explores the flawed methodology of recall studies commonly used to justify such bans and why problem drinkers are unlikely to be influenced by advertising restrictions. The briefing concludes with an examination of the unintended consequences of advertising bans, including reduced competition in the alcohol industry and significant financial impacts on broadcasters and media platforms already struggling with declining advertising revenues. Dr. Snowdon argues that if products are legal, they should be advertised freely, provided the advertisements meet standards of honesty and decency. The discussion highlights the broader trend of successive advertising bans across multiple sectors and questions where such restrictions might end. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs Podcast interview, IEA Communications' Callum Price interviews Dr. Steve Davies, Senior Education Fellow, on the growing crisis of state welfare spending in the UK. Davies explains how the welfare bill has ballooned to approximately 12% of government expenditure (excluding pensions and healthcare), with incapacity and disability benefits alone expected to reach £100 billion by 2030 - up 25% since 2019. The discussion explores how Gordon Brown's well-intentioned income supplement system has created a welfare trap, where means-tested benefits impose effective marginal tax rates of 80% that discourage people from increasing their work hours or seeking better-paid employment. Davies argues that the current system is both financially unsustainable and socially destructive, trapping people in dependency while failing to address underlying structural problems like housing costs and low productivity. He critiques the limitations of technocratic reforms, explaining how attempts to tighten eligibility criteria often simply displace demand to other, more expensive programmes. The conversation covers the explosive growth in mental health problems among young people and the geographical mobility constraints caused by housing costs that keep people stuck in areas with limited employment opportunities. The interview concludes with Davies proposing radical alternatives to the current state-dominated system, including a return to mutual aid and voluntary collective action rather than traditional charity or market-based solutions. He advocates for either a minimal state safety net or universal basic services model, combined with locally-controlled, community-based welfare provision that draws on tacit local knowledge. Davies warns that without fundamental reform, the UK risks creating an even more punitive welfare system following a future financial crisis, and calls for honest political conversation about the severity of the challenges facing the current approach to social support. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs Podcast Interview, IEA Executive Director Tom Clougherty interviews Dan Neidle, founder of Tax Policy Associates and one of the UK's most respected tax experts. The conversation covers the fundamental problems with Britain's tax system, examining public misunderstanding of how tax thresholds work, the challenges of pro-growth tax reform, and why wealth taxes are likely to fail. They also discuss the absurd cliff edges in income tax that discourage people from earning between £100,000-£125,000, creating effective marginal rates of up to 62%. Dan explains why current tax policy is made through "political theatre" rather than rational design, leading to a system he describes as "pure rabbit" above £200,000 in earnings. The discussion covers the economic incidence of taxation, revealing how taxes legally paid by businesses often fall on workers and consumers. They examine specific reform proposals including full expensing for business investment, radical VAT base broadening, and replacing stamp duty with annual land value taxes. Dan also critiques popular wealth tax proposals, arguing they would apply punitive effective rates of up to 75% on a highly mobile group of around 10,000 wealthy individuals. The interview concludes with analysis of the government's likely approach to raising taxes in the autumn budget. Dan argues that while politicians prefer targeting "other people" with complex loophole closures, the most honest approach would be putting a percentage point on income tax rates. Throughout the conversation, both speakers emphasize areas where tax experts across the political spectrum agree on rational reforms, even while disagreeing on overall tax levels and the size of the state. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs Podcast, IEA Executive Director Tom Clougherty is joined by Managing Editor Daniel Freeman and Editorial Director Kristian Niemietz for a wide-ranging discussion covering three major policy areas. The conversation examines the spiralling costs and delays of HS2, which now has no fixed opening date despite ballooning to over £100 billion for a truncated route that no longer reaches Manchester or Leeds. They also debate whether classical liberals should abandon the term "liberal" in response to Rod Liddle's argument that the word has been captured by progressive movements, and conclude with an analysis of Donald Trump's proposed tax legislation extending the 2017 reforms. The discussion reveals how Britain's planning system makes infrastructure projects vastly more expensive than comparable European examples, with the French TGV between Tours and Bordeaux costing under €8 billion for the same distance as HS2's London-Birmingham route. The hosts argue that excessive consultation processes, environmental regulations, and multiple veto players have created a system where Britain struggles to build anything efficiently. On the liberal terminology debate, Niemietz pushes back against claims that "liberal" now means "woke," arguing that in Britain the term retains its classical meaning and that progressives themselves reject the liberal label. The Trump tax bill analysis highlights the contradiction between extending pro-growth measures from 2017 while introducing distortionary new provisions like exempting tips and overtime from taxation, plus car loan deductions for American vehicles only. Most concerning is the proposed withholding tax on foreign investment, which could undermine America's ability to attract international capital while simultaneously running massive deficits. The hosts suggest this reflects the administration's inconsistent approach to trade deficits and foreign investment, potentially threatening the dollar's reserve currency status that enables such fiscal flexibility. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Free the Power podcast, the IEA's occasional series on free market solutions to energy challenges, Chief Operating Officer Andy Mayer interviews Guy Newey, Chief Executive of the Energy Systems Catapult. The conversation explores the contentious debate over locational pricing in UK energy markets - a technical reform that could fundamentally reshape how Britain prices and distributes electricity. They discuss the transition from a centralised system of large coal and gas power stations to a distributed network of intermittent renewables, electric vehicles, heat pumps, and smart devices that requires millions of actors rather than dozens. Guy explains how Britain's current single national electricity price is becoming increasingly inefficient as the system evolves, leading to billions in constraint costs where wind farms are paid to switch off while other generators are paid to switch on elsewhere. He advocates for zonal or nodal pricing systems that would create regional electricity prices reflecting local supply and demand, potentially offering Scotland some of the cheapest energy in Western Europe while incentivising efficient placement of generation and storage. The discussion covers fierce industry opposition from renewable developers concerned about investment uncertainty, the potential for £3-4 billion in annual system efficiency gains, and the successful implementation of similar systems in markets like Texas. The interview concludes with an examination of the political challenges facing Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, who must balance Clean Power 2030 ambitions against industry warnings about slowed renewable investment. Guy argues that locational pricing could drive industrial revival, tackle fuel poverty, and position Britain as a leader in affordable clean energy. He emphasises that decarbonisation will only succeed at the necessary pace if clean energy solutions become cheaper and better than fossil fuel alternatives, making this pricing reform crucial for the UK's energy transition and economic competitiveness. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs Briefing, Communications Manager Reem Ibrahim interviews Christopher Snowdon, Head of Lifestyle Economics, about Quinn Slobodian's book "Hayek's B******s: The Neoliberal Roots of the Populist Right." The discussion examines Slobodian's controversial thesis that traces intellectual connections between free-market economists like Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises to the modern populist right movement, including figures like Donald Trump and Marine Le Pen. Snowdon critiques Slobodian's methodology, arguing that the author has worked backwards from his conclusion to cherry-pick tenuous connections between libertarian think tanks and populist politicians. The conversation explores how Slobodian mischaracterises key figures like Mises, who was consistently pro-open borders and anti-racist, and fails to acknowledge that modern populism fundamentally rejects core neoliberal principles like free trade and globalization. Snowdon highlights the irony that populist movements actually share more common ground with left-wing critics of neoliberalism than with free-market advocates. The interview concludes with analysis of why Slobodian's timing was particularly unfortunate, publishing just as Trump's return to power with explicitly protectionist policies undermines any supposed connection to Hayekian economics. Snowdon argues that rather than being disciples of free-market thought, today's populists represent a complete rejection of neoliberal principles, making Slobodian's central thesis fundamentally flawed. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, Communications Director Callum Price is joined by Executive Director Tom Clougherty and Editorial Director Kristian Niemietz to examine the government's latest spending review. The conversation covers Rachel Reeves' announcement of increased NHS funding - another 3% real terms increase annually - while implementing spending cuts across most other departments through what they describe as "classic salami slicing" rather than genuine zero-based budgeting. They discuss how the government has abandoned any meaningful NHS reform agenda, reverting to simply throwing money at the health service despite previous promises of structural change.The hosts analyse the broader economic context, noting that GDP shrank 0.3% in April while national debt sits at around 100% of GDP with over £100 billion spent annually on debt interest. With taxation at generational highs and borrowing costs extremely elevated, they argue the government faces an inevitable fiscal black hole that may require further tax increases come autumn. The discussion critiques the government's approach to capital spending, which focuses heavily on defence and social housing rather than growth-generating infrastructure.The conversation concludes with an examination of missed opportunities for genuine economic reform, particularly in housing and planning where the government could deliver significant growth through deregulation rather than subsidies. They argue that despite Labour's stated focus on growth as their "number one mission," the actual policies - from employment rights legislation to continued planning restrictions - point in the opposite direction. The hosts express frustration at the government's failure to pursue supply-side reforms that could address the UK's fundamental economic challenges without requiring additional public spending. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs briefing, Communications Manager Reem Ibraham interviews Kristian Niemietz, Editorial Director, who has written a piece in The Telegraph entitled "The NHS Truths the Left Don't Want You to Hear." The conversation examines whether the NHS was ever truly the best healthcare system in the world, with Niemietz arguing that it never was, despite popular belief in a "lost golden age." They discuss how the NHS has consistently lagged behind other developed countries' healthcare systems across measurable clinical outcomes, avoidable mortality rates, and cancer survival rates, challenging the narrative that recent funding cuts are responsible for current failings. Niemietz debunks the myth of systematic NHS defunding, explaining that while budget growth slowed in the 2010s, the system was never actually starved of funds as commonly claimed. He argues that the assertion of deliberate underfunding to enable privatisation makes no theoretical sense, as poor NHS performance typically leads to calls for more spending rather than privatisation. The discussion covers how Health Secretary Wes Streeting initially presented himself as a radical reformer but has since moved away from fundamental institutional changes, focusing instead on minor adjustments around the edges. The interview concludes with Niemietz outlining his vision for genuine NHS reform, drawing on examples from countries like the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and East Germany that successfully transitioned from NHS-type systems to social insurance models. He proposes a gradual transformation that would maintain current arrangements as a default option while opening up new choices for those who want them, allowing the system to evolve over time without disrupting care for those who prefer the status quo. Niemietz argues that such transitions have been accomplished elsewhere in less than a decade without significant disruption to patients. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, IEA Director of Communications Callum Price interviews David Seymour, New Zealand's Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Regulation and leader of the ACT Party. The conversation covers New Zealand's productivity challenges and Seymour's landmark Regulatory Standards Bill, which would establish statutory principles for good regulation based on protecting liberty and property rights. They discuss how New Zealand is tackling government bloat through fiscal restraint, cutting spending growth to just 0.9% while facing significant demographic pressures from an aging population.Seymour explains his approach to welfare reform, arguing that one in six working-age New Zealanders being on benefits is unsustainable, and outlines plans to raise the pension age incrementally. The discussion explores how his government has successfully introduced charter schools outside union control, allowing innovative employment models and tripling staff-to-teacher ratios in some cases. He criticises the education system's prioritisation of union interests over children's outcomes and describes the rapid implementation of seven new charter schools within 15 months of taking office.The interview concludes with Seymour's analysis of New Zealand's planning reform, replacing sustainability-based resource management law with property rights-focused legislation. He argues that current planning systems have become so restrictive they're "destroying who we are as a country," citing how the climbing walls where Sir Edmund Hillary supposedly learned to climb have been closed for health and safety reasons. Seymour advocates for a system where property owners can develop freely unless they materially impact others' property rights, moving away from subjective sustainability assessments that cost billions and create massive uncertainty. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe

In this Institute of Economic Affairs podcast, Communications Director Callum Price hosts Executive Director Tom Clougherty and Editorial Director Kristian Niemietz for a wide-ranging discussion on three major political and economic issues facing Britain. The conversation covers the government's troubled handling of winter fuel payment reforms, examining how Labour's partial U-turn reveals the deeper political challenges of reforming old-age benefits in an ageing society. They also explore Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch's new focus on tackling "lawfare" and her party's plans to potentially withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights, discussing how legal activism and judicial overreach are constraining democratic governance and economic decision-making. The discussion delves into the concerning fiscal projections showing Britain faces an additional 11% of GDP in spending on elderly care, pensions and benefits - equivalent to doubling income tax bills. Niemietz explains how ageing demographics create powerful political incentives that make meaningful reform extremely difficult, even for governments with large majorities. The hosts examine how the current system of fiscal churn sees almost everyone both paying high taxes and receiving benefits simultaneously, arguing for more fundamental integration of the tax and benefit systems along the lines of Milton Friedman's negative income tax proposals. The conversation concludes by analysing recent economic speeches from Rachel Reeves, Mel Stride and Nigel Farage, revealing the tensions within each party's approach. They discuss Labour's contradictory mix of industrial strategy rhetoric constrained by fiscal reality, Reform's populist tax cuts funded by questionable savings projections, and the Conservatives' renewed focus on supply-side reforms while grappling with their poor track record in government. The hosts argue that Britain needs fundamental state transformation rather than incremental changes, but question whether any current political party truly grasps the scale of reform required to restore economic dynamism. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insider.iea.org.uk/subscribe