Should the government reduce public sector borrowing?

No

Yes, but not at the expense of cutting public sector pay, we should just rely more heavily on taxing the rich and big businesses

The government sould give legitimate evidence to support sector borrowing in justify it for either the public or independent board.

In the long run yes but in the short term we need to borrow more to invest in growing industries like renewables.

A balance will need to be sought. If industry or output increases then so would revenue to cover borrowing.

not at the expense of pulic services like social services, disability benefits. All public services need to be well managed,

Only when other things the government urgently need to spend out on, reduce significantly. And when the economy is gaining eg above 1%

Borrowing should be reduced primarily by raising taxes, with some element of spending cuts where necessary.

I don't agree as it'll always be an excuse for cuts but the amount of debt leaves them no choice.

We pay enough taxes, what needs to happen is better management of funds. Public sector shouldn’t need to borrow with the amount of tax revenues paid.

Yes in the long term, but not at the expense of stymying any growth and fixing the issues inherent to the system at present.

No, but overtime should replace it with fundraising where the workers get paid a commission of the fundraising

No, increasing debt to stimulate the economy with national infrastructure projects is an effective way to develop the country however debt should not be used to meet the costs of Operational Expenditure.

The government should borrow money to build social housing and improve infrastructure

Only when feasible to do so without putting additional strain on the country.

Tax the rich more and claim tax for companies, Embassies and non-doms that are avoiding, which should contribute to state services and reduce borrowing.

With the right borrowing we can stimulate growth and investment with an eye to then payback

Depends on what sort of fiscal and monetary policy is in place at the time. I feel that the debt:GDP ratio should be revised upwards to provide the government with more scope to borrow to fund infrastructure growth

I don't mind the borrowing as long as it's good times for all instead of the greedy ones

Public sector borrowing is one of a basket of economic strategies. It should not be used to fund tax cuts.

Over time yes but short term borrowing is currently essential to invest in future growth

Focus on growth to gain back the money spent rather than additional taxes making it harder for businesses to grow and employ more people.

Not initially but there should be a long term plan

It's not real money now so it is just more numbers added to a false balance sheet.

I believe government should get cross political agreement to an infrastructure with at least a 30 year plan which can't be interfered with by short thinking government periods.

It depends what it is for. It should not be used for military and defence but for building social housing, improving the education system and improving infrastructure.

Far too nuanced for this survey. Context dependent.

In a competent economic system a nation should have a national sovereign fund to draw on like Norway. Incompetent short termism is what leads to problems. In theory PSB should be constrained for all but infrastructure investment required to support necessary development. Too much is wasted however and political vanity projects are too much in evidence. Corruption and too little control abound. PSB is a vital tool but poorly used.

Yes to the question but should properly fund the public sector centrally rather than borrowing through cutting defence budget and increasing taxes for super rich/corporations and closing loopholes for the super rich/corporations

Borrowing to grow the tax base is fine. That can mean for economic stimulus or to keep the population more productive.