And Another Thing…

Really, Tom, how about that 2005 EU referendum pledge?

Ah, but Greece you see. Greece has changed everything. Greece Greece Greece Greece Greece. Greece.

Did I mention Greece?

And wondering quite how the crisis in Greece stops early spending cuts having a deflationary effect in the UK is just too Old Politics for words.

Either you argue that the Lisbon Treaty was different from the proposed constitution, or you believe that Labour broke a promise, in which case we are no different from – and deserving of no more criticism than – the current Tory government.

>>we are no different from – and deserving of no more criticism than – the current Tory government

Oh, I must be confused, I thought Labour were in power and the Tories were in opposition when the Lisbon Treaty went through parliament.

Labours argument against the 2010-11 cuts was that it would cause a double dip recession.

Today we find out that growth is expected to pick up to 0.7% by the end of the year, even with the cuts.

Tom, this is getting tedious already. This isn’t a Liberal Democrat government – it’s a coalition. The Liberal Democrats on their own would accomplish precisely ZERO of their manifesto pledges rather than some of them as they are now.

That is unlike the Liebour government which had the outright power to fulfil it’s manifesto pledges but chose not to – the most despicable being it’s renegading on the EU constitution referendum.

I love how every suddely cares so much about the Lisbon Treaty, but I sense they have all missed the point.

If Labour broke its manifesto then it is only commiting the same sin as the coalition parties. Therefore in this respect no worse. Parties should be trying to fulfill manifesto pledges if they do not they are undermining democracy.

Since the Lib Dems have been aiming for a hung parliament for a long time then their manifesto should include what they would do in a coalition, what they would compromise, what they would abandon and what they would not do.

The electorate, certainly where I lived, believed that the Lib Dems would not compromise on the economy and would not threaten the recovery with premature cuts. They broke their manifesto and the existence of a coalition does not justify it.

Tom, you are absolutely right to highlight the LibDems’ hypocrisy. Just because your comments largely fall on stony ground doesn’t make them less true.

Prior to the election, the LibDems were following the ideas of the sainted Vince Cable regarding the economy. Now they say the opposite. What a bunch of total *@?*%?^~$ !!!!

Sigh.

The coalition agreement is “cobbled together” from parts of both the Conservative and Lib Dem manifesto. You’d have a point if the coalition government agreed to do something that goes against what was said in both parties’ manifesto commitments. But here, the Conservative manifesto commitment is being adopted.

NICKY
*@?*%?^~$ !!!! Just doesn’t do justice to the Lib/dems traitorous duplicity.

Before the next election the people will be saying *@?*%?^~$ !!!! a lot and loudly prior to giving the Lib/dems a spanking at the polls.

Nick Clegg will be full member of the Conservative party by then but at least that piece Cleggy hypocrisy will end.

Tom Harris said “Either you argue that the Lisbon Treaty was different from the proposed constitution, or you believe that Labour broke a promise”

You do remember the Labour Government going to court and arguing that manifesto pledges were merely “aspirations” and not legally binding promises, don’t you Tom ?

Less Greece Greece Greece than coalition coalition coalition.

You think the Lib Dems are happy with the cuts? I doubt it, but it’s… a coalition. There are plenty of ways to tear chunks out of the Lib Dems, but giving ground to the Tories is a perfectly acceptable way to act in a coalition.

Tom. Its a coalition so both parties have had to change their stance on some things to make it work. I know you will not understand as Labour is incapable of working with anyone or anything.

This afternoon I was at home preparing for an exam. I thought I would have a break and turn on the TV and watch some news. Big mistake! There was our new Deputy PM, the minister for nothing, looking every inch a Tory. I gave it 5 minutes and thought that’s enough, time to switch off

I wonder how the majority of Lib Dem voters must feel seeing how their party leader is now very much a Tory spokesperson?

I thought no more TV for me, for the rest of the day, back to the studies. Eventually went back to the television in the evening and tuned in to see Channel 4 news.

And there he was in front of me, Danny Alexander, the minister who knows nothing, trying to debate the economy with Mr Darling.

My initial thoughts from watching TV today is, the Lib Dems are playing with fire and could easily find themselves being hammered in future elections, Danny Alexander does not hold a bright future in the Treasury and Alistair Darling must be conviced to remain the Showdow Chancellor for some time to come.

Would you have been happy for the Lib Dems to make compromises, and change their stance, to reach an agreement and form a coalition with the Labour Party?

Aren’t you falling into your own trap, and forgetting the court ruling which said the electorate had no legitimate reason to expect manifesto promises to be followed through – or at least something like that. That might have been about the Lisbon Treaty, but it’s now case law, and so nobody needs to believe a single word written in an election manifesto, they could all be empty promises.

@Nicky, Mr Mxyx, Sturt, Tom etc

…..and round in circles we go with not one card carrying member or supporter of the Labour party offering one iota of a practical idea to extricate us from the financial mess created by the last government.

You may not like what the coalition is doing because you don’t like to face the reality or admit or accept the truth of where we are & how we got here.

It seems not one of you can actually use a simple calculator! You are all clearly still possesssed of the idea that there is such a thing as “government money” which seemingly is in endless supply & gets picked from the Money tree at the end of the garden at 11 Downing street every morning after it’s been left overnight by the fairies!

That makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Fortunately for the rest of us, the new occupants of the Government benches seem possesed of a little more common sense and realism.

….Meanwhile, in other news , Spain is about to have to ask for a bail out. Have you ANY idea what that means?

Tom, opposition so suits you.

But you have lost the big propaganda battle in that the deficit is being portrayed as purely Labour folly and nothing at all to do with our mates in the city. You need to re-win that one on 22 June (budget day).

Ok, let’s flesh this out a bit.

In between manifesto being published and 24 May the Eurozone got into real trouble with Greece on the brink and talk of economic meltdown spreading to Spain and Portugal.

You’ve also quoted David Laws a bit out of context (opportunist, of course not, why would I suggest such a thing?) I think you should see the whole e-mail he sent to Lib Dem members:

“Dear Friend,

My Labour predecessor, Liam Byrne, left me a note saying ‘Dear Chief Secretary, There’s no money left.’ He may claim this is joke, but sadly it is all too true.

Labour have left the nation’s finances in an utterly ruinous state and we face a colossal task ahead of us. That is why today the Chancellor and I announced the creation of the Office of Budget Responsibility as well as the date for the emergency budget in six weeks time on 22nd June.

It is also why over the next week I will be working to identify £6bn of wasteful government spending that we can save in order to start to pay down the disastrous deficit left to us by Labour.

In addition to this, every new spending commitment and pilot project signed off by Labour ministers since the turn of the year will be individually reviewed in a bid to find additional savings. This is simply due diligence by the new coalition government in relation to some of the irresponsible decisions we have inherited.

I would like to give you my personal guarantee that whilst the decisions ahead will be tough I will always put social justice at their heart. I have, and I will continue to reject any proposals which would damage key services or put at risk those on lower incomes.

This is not merely a coalition of competent accountants. The challenge we face is how to address the deficit while protecting the quality of key services, making this a fairer country and ensuring that those on the lowest incomes are protected as far as possible from the actions that are necessary.

This will not be easy. But there is more chance of it being achieved with Lib Dem presence in HM Treasury than without it.

Best wishes,

David Laws MP
Chief Secretary to the Treasury”

The Tories governing alone would take their axe to any big budgets in their path – at least we can make sure that the most vulnerable are protected from the effects of the cuts which Labour would have had to make as well. Remember it was Alistair Darling, your ex chancellor, who talked about cuts worse than those implemented by Margaret Thatcher.

Tom, are you in the “head in sand” camp (which would surprise me) or what exactly would you be doing in Government?

I have spent the last four years working with people on low or virtually no incomes who have really suffered under the way Labour ran the tax credits/benefits system so please don’t harbour the illusion that you were in any way perfect.

The LIB DEMS are playing with fire, I agree with a previous comment. A lot of people I have spoken to who voted LIB DEM have become disappointed as this new coalition government prepare to make the cuts that they keep saying are needed. I hope Nick Clegg enjoys the power because people see it as selling out to the Tories.
I never mind anyone having a different opinion to me (I wouldn’t I am an equality and diversity practitioner) and I am sure most Politian’s can live with that too, what I think is very distasteful is swopping sides when your appear to gain so much from the power. So enjoy this powerful time Nick – not sure you will get another one.

@ TTD:

You make the mistake of assuming that a nation’s economy works in the same way as you’d run a small business. Unfortunately it isn’t that simple. The economy needs stimulus, not cuts, otherwise it goes into a depression and unemployment shoots up, businesses go under and people lose their homes. The effect of making economies, cutting, actually makes the situation worse. This may seem counter-intuitive, but the evidence is staring us in the face, whether we want to see that or not. This is not a party political point, this is economic reality.

Lord Layard (an emeritus professor of economics at the London School of Economics), and other economists, wrote to the Telegraph in April that

These cuts are described as efficiency savings. It will lead directly to job losses and indirectly to further falls in spending through the standard multiplier process.

Rash action now could imperil not only jobs but also the prospects for reducing the deficit.

Also signing the letter were two Nobel laureates – Joseph Stiglitz and Robert Solow – and five former members of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee, including former deputy governors Sir Andrew Large and Rachel Lomax.

But please carry on patronising us with your superior knowledge about the economy, money trees and fairies.

@ Nicky “But please carry on patronising us with your superior knowledge about the economy, money trees and fairies.”

Be delighted.

You and the rest of the “government spenders” miss the simple fact that government spending does not equal wealth creation. Yes it puts money in people’s pockets temporarily that they spend and that, in turn, fuels some commerce, but it also creates debt that then has to be serviced. The whole model is a house of cards that will collapse around our ears sooner rather than later because there is no basic wealth creation happening. It has to be based on printing money, an asset fire-sale or borrowing. None is sustainable.

Government spending is also a highly innefficient way of injecting money into an economy because it costs money to collect tax, decide what to do with it and then spend it. And that’s before we get into the area of government being experts at wasting money and spending money inefficiently.

How much of every £1 collected in tax gets spent effectively and efficiently? I don’t know, but clearly its much, much less than £1.

So do I want tax money wasted on “Diversity co-ordinators” on £40K a year just to keep them in work, or would I rather they sat at home on the dole (much cheaper!)or, better still got off their backsides and made an attempt to join the wealth creating part of the economy?

Its rough, its not nice, people are going to get hurt, some people may even die, but that’s what you have to deal with when you need to recover from the sort of mess we are in. Of course if you manage your finances effectively, properly, and with discipline you avoid much of the mess in the first place.

Ultimately, the nation’s economy is just the same as a small business or your personal finances in as much as if you stretch things too far they break – just ask the Greeks. And look at the social breakdown they are now having to deal with all because they’ve run out of cash and nor can they borrow any more either. The only funding they can now get comes not with strings but with chains.

Only the private sector genuinly creates wealth and that is what needs to be supported. That is what we need to get moving (so a tax on jobs wouldn’t be an ideal or sensible thing to do eh? )

If you really think we can spend our way out of this mess, well, I have some beach front property in Wolverhampton you’d probably be interested in. The model you advocate is precisely what got us to where we are & its a sure sign of madness to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result.

Its going to get messy, people ARE going to get hurt, but you can’t make an omelette etc….

I was really hoping for more details about the fairies and the Downing Street money tree. It’s about as believable as suggesting that everyone in the public sector is an overpaid ‘Diversity Co-ordinator’ rather than (say) a nurse, teacher or policeman. Or suggesting that it’s better to pay someone to be unemployed rather than use their tax revenue. Or that they should get a job in ‘wealth creation’ when people aren’t spending money – and businesses are going start going into liquidation at the same rate as they did when the Cons were in last time. So much for them being the party for small businesses! Or making an entirely misinformed comparison with Greece. Incidentally, one of the reasons Greece went into its downward spiral was that too many people didn’t want to stump up their taxes.

@Nicky:

Of course not everybody in the public sector is a “diversity co-ordinator” but what is clear is that the ration of administrators & pen pushers to nurses or policemen etc is completely out of kilter.

The cause iof the Greek problems are in many areas, but my point is when you run out of money you end up where Greece is. We do not want to go there or anywhere near it.

And you throw out idle claims about the rate of liquidations – put some figures up why don’t you?

I expect you think public sector pensions are affordable too?!

Done with this, you have your head in the sand as usual. I have no idea what you do for a living (if anything) but clearly our grasp of business and finance is questionable.

Fortunately for the rest of us the new government appears to have slightly more of a clue. You can judge as to whether what they are doing is success or failure in, oh, say about 5 years

OK, this will be my absolutely last word on this thread as frankly, I don’t know about you, but personally I have better things to do. I do have gainful employment, thanks for asking, which keeps me pretty busy. But well done you for implying that anyone who isn’t a Tory must be an unemployed (by lifestyle choice) wastrel.

For someone who claims to be part of the lean, mean, no messing about wealth-creating private sector, you do seem to spend an awful lot of time, day and night, just arguing the toss on the internet. And you like to imply you’re some kind of top entrepreneur. Hmm. Does Sir Alan Sugar write long rambling posts based on stuff he’s read in the Daily Mail? Does Duncan Bannatyne like to put or or :~ to illustrate his train of thought or accuse people who don’t agree with him of believing in fairies and magic money trees? No, they don’t. And here’s a thing, they’re both top business people who support Labour. But why? I hear you ask. The short answer is, because they’re not daft and don’t believe the Tories’ own self-serving propaganda. The Tories, for all their spin about how they’re the party that supports business, presided over two of the worst post war recessions on record (note! without the aid of a catastrophic global crisis) – the early eighties recession entailed 6 consecutive quarters of negative growth (18 months), and the early 90s recession, which entailed seven consecutive quarters of negative growth (21 months, nearly three years). And there was also the matter of how interest rates went from 8 per cent to 13 per cent in six months.

our grasp of business and finance is questionable. ‘Our’? So you include yourself in that statement. Yes, your grasp of business and finance is questionable, firstly because of your stubborn belief against all evidence that a nation’s economy works the same way as a small business, and secondly because of your blind faith that the Tories (including the Yellow Tories, AKA the LibDems) are somehow great with the economy. There’s none so blind as will not see! If Georgie boy had been in charge when the global economy collapsed his laissez-faire approach would have turned a crisis into a catastrophe.

PS: Osborne and Cameron are being highly duplicitous about Labour’s record. The OBR (which they set up), has confirmed that Darling left the economy in a sustainable recovery, with a credible and fully funded programme for deficit reduction. Now it’s up to them whether they screw up or not.

@ Nicky,

Well that’s told me!:)

As to questioning what I do – It doesn’t occur to you that I might be doing well enough that I can afford to spend a bit of time pulling your chain on this stuff does it? My kids are in private schools etc etc etc….

My wife OTOH, who is also somewhere right of centre, is a teacher in the public sector and a paid up member of the NUT (though only for the insurance it has to be said!)

Glad you are gainfully employed – my money’s on it being in the public sector – Are you a “diversity co-ordinator” by chance?

As for the smileys, well, you have to laugh about this stuff sometimes – its either that or cry given the mess things are in. 13 years of a labour government and all you lot can do is blame Thatcher !! Not an iota of a hint of one of you taking a shred of responsibility for the mess we are in. And you wonder why people like me look on Labour in the way we do?

Some of us knew 13 years ago what Brown would do eventually. I think it was when he nailed my Pension fund that I first decided he truly was an idiot. And yes, there are indeed a few major business people who support Labour – its a mystery to the 90+% who don’t as to why though

As to Tory recessions, yep there were recessions in the 80′s & 90s. Its called the economic cycle. It happens, always has, probably always will. Only an idiot would claim to have abolished it….hang on….

They can’t hold a candle to this recession though and in each case we emerged with an economy that worked. We will this time too but we are coming from a looooong way back this time and so the action to correct it is going to have to be that much more severe.

Lets also not forget what the economy looked like in 1979 and then what shape it was in in 1997 versus where it is today before you start trying to claim that somehow Labour has done a better job with the Economy though eh?

As Mrs T said, sooner or later all Labour governments run out of other people’s money, and that, sadly, is exactly where we are – AGAIN

As usual you have dodged all the simple but salient questions like “where’s the cash coming from then?” and so I say again that Your (note correct spelling this time;-) ) grasp of economics is clearly very shaky.

Lastly, as to Darling’s fully funded defecit reduction plan that is just hilarious. Darling left a “plan” that called for £50Bn of cuts but not a word as to where they would come from. He also left dodgy growth forecasts that have had to be cut within two months and that mean that the structural deficit is £12Bn ore so wider than thought.

I also don’t call a 50% reduction in the annual deficit over 4 years a credible plan. That plan still has us borrowing at the rate of in excess of £75Bn a year in 4 years time (after having borrowed the thick end of an additional £450,000,000,000 in the intervening period) We have to do much, much better than that.

OTOH, if the fairies have told you how we can grow some more money on the trees, then great, do tell how!