Darling tells us Labour cuts will be tougher and deeper than Thatchers

kennyboy66_2

JasonLVC wrote: »

Whilst Darling may be a realist and being honest in this interview about the 'Thatcher style cuts', why no mention in the Budget or in the backing documents?

If Darling wants to make some cuts, may I suggest he starts with the advertising budget. It seems that every other advert on TV at the moment is for stopping smoking, drink driving, becoming a teacher, becoming a social worker, joining the Army, etc.

I even noticed during CSI Las Vegas on Five this week that it is 'sponsored' by HMRC! A show involving picking over dead corpses and HMRC. A match made in heaven. But why are the taxpayers sponsoring a TV show?

You missed out "Talk to Frank" - the Home Office drug adverts and the myriad "wear a condom" and sexual health adverts.

Listening to commercial radio makes me feel I am too old and have missed out on a golden age of drinking, drug taking and promiscuity.:(

doire_2

Bulls..... come out, come out wherever you are

Linton

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Rather big news. Expect this one to dissapear soon, or a retraction of the statement, unless labour have taken the wise decision to actually be honest.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8587877.stm

Pretty bold, and rather brave statement from Darling.

Glad to actually see a statement of this type tough, i.e. one of reality. Mucho respect Alistairs way from me!

Err - didnt public expenditure INCREASE in real terms during Mrs Thatcher's reign?

Simon11

I read quite a few papers yesterday on the budget. I can't believe how poorly written it was.

For example, on the sun paper, it was saying Brown had held back from making cuts and increasing taxes to reduce the national debt.

YET on same page stories of people who wanted more from the goverment in the forum of benefits ect

Daily Express was just as bad!!

baby_boomer

Crazy election isn't it?

Labour seems to be saying - You can't trust the Tories because they'll cut like Thatcher, but you can trust us because we'll cut by more than Thatcher.

I'm confused.

Rochdale_Pioneers

baby_boomer wrote: »

Crazy election isn't it?

Labour seems to be saying - You can't trust the Tories because they'll cut like Thatcher, but you can trust us because we'll cut by more than Thatcher.

I'm confused.

Don't be. Labour have said that they will cut 2/3rds of the structural deficit. The Tories have said that this isn't enough, instead they would cut the bulk of the structural deficit. The debate isn't about who will cut - both will. Both are spinning that the other isn't being honest about it, but in reality they're both talking about basically the same figure and neither have stated where these cust will come.

The only real differences between them are timing and competence. Labour - as backed by the IMF and EU - want to delay the cuts to embed the recovery. The Tories - as backed by the markets and Branson - want cuts immediately to make a start on reducing the deficit. In reality Labour are also cutting now as well, so really the big dividing line is competence.

On one hand you have Darling who has been berated for forecasting first the size of the crash then the hoped for recovery. Desperately being his own man and almost certainly to be replaced if Labour stay in power. On the other hand you has Osborne who having managed to impress neither his own party nor the city looks certain to be replaced by Clarke. Or Hammond.

Its no wonder that a hung parliament - and Cable into the Treasury - has such appeal.

tomterm8

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

Osborne who having managed to impress neither his own party nor the city looks certain to be replaced by Clarke. .

If I knew Clarke would be appointed chancellor, I would be voting Tory, even though I hate the &&&&&&s. But I am not sure. I don't see Cable ever getting to the Treasury.

marklv

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Rather big news. Expect this one to dissapear soon, or a retraction of the statement, unless labour have taken the wise decision to actually be honest.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8587877.stm

Pretty bold, and rather brave statement from Darling.

Glad to actually see a statement of this type tough, i.e. one of reality. Mucho respect Alistairs way from me!

Darling is robot. He only does what Gordon tells him. This macho talk of being tougher than Thatcher is just electioneering to try to grab some of the Sun and Daily Mail readers. If Labour is really planning a war against the public sector they will face strikes galore assuming they win the election - and Brown will be ditched by his own party.

Bashing the public sector with pay freezes or below inflation pay rises makes good headlines in the tabloid press but does very little to reduce the deficit. There is a political risk for any Labour government to fight a war against their own backers and even Brown and Darling are not completely stupid. Almost, but not quite. If they go down this road it will their political suicide and the likely rise of the hard Left again within Labour.

Unfortunately the only way to reduce the deficit is to raise taxes - there is no other way! Why not just face the truth? Why all these cloak and dagger games?

marklv

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

We must rid this country of the evils of leftism to solve the deficit!

Start by abolishing the benefits budget and doubling the police budget to compensate for any uprising of the idle and vagrants.

Then stop the pointless rebuilding of perfectly good hospitals and schools and other crazy leftist initiatives

You urgently need psychiatric help. Please see your GP as soon as possible. :eek:

ManAtHome

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

The only real differences between them are timing and competence. Labour - as backed by the IMF and EU - want to delay the cuts to embed the recovery. The Tories - as backed by the markets and Branson - want cuts immediately to make a start on reducing the deficit. In reality Labour are also cutting now as well, so really the big dividing line is competence.

Yes, that's pretty much the difference, although whether it's competence or the slightest smidge of honesty is a moot point...

Until very recently (examination of the Budget small print), it was all about whether we wanted "Labour investment" or "Tory swingeing cuts" - now it's pretty apparent there will be the same "swingeing cuts" whoever gets in.

So - sounds like a choice between up-front cuts or stealth cuts amounting to the same result - does that make Osborne the most competent in the house of pr@s (he did forecast these cuts 6 months before anyone else after all)?

And as you say, Labour (+IMF+EU) want to delay the cuts, but have already started - is that competence, lies, spin, or something else?