How Far, How Fast?
I didn't bother to read Ed Miliband's latest speech about his plans to make the UK PLC 'live within its means' if Labour wins the general election in 2015.
The reason being that the two Eds (Miliband and Balls) have had nothing of note to say on the subject for the past four years, while opposing every measure that the Coalition Government has introduced to rein in public spending - even the eminently sensible step of ending child benefit payments to relatively comfortable citizens earning over £60,000 a year.
The original intention of the welfare state was to provide a 'hand up' to those needing help and assistance help and assistance in getting back on their feet, and if you ask me that's the only kind of system that will command public support in the years ahead.
How Far, How Fast? (24 March 2011)
Every time I hear a Labour party spokesperson say - "Too far, too fast" - in relation to the government's public spending cuts.
I hear a voice in my head which demands - "How far, how fast?" - because everyone knows that if Labour had won the general election, they'd have been cutting spending as well.
The official line, of course, is that a Labour chancellor would be cutting the deficit in half over four years.
Yes, but we know that already - so what does this mean?
Labour originally introduced the 1p rise in National Insurance which came into effect yesterday, not the present government.
And Labour had also planned a series of increases in fuel duty of around 5p a litre which were ditched in yesterday's budget.
Now, of course, in opposition Labour will say that they would not have followed through on their plans.
But what would they do exactly - how would Labour's cuts differ from the government's cuts?
If the party can't answer that, then they're not taking the whole business very seriously because they've only just left government after 13 years in power.
'Nicer Cuts Under Labour' (1 April 2011)
Boris Johnson likes to cultivate the image of an amiable court jester, but underneath that mop of tousled blond hair there hides an acute political brain.
In last night's Question Time programme the London Mayor put his finger on the message that Ed Miliband is trying to sell to the voters which is:
'Nicer Cuts Under Labour' - without of course explaining what this empty slogan means.
What the debate amongst the Question Time panel showed is that all the mainstream political parties agree that public spending must be reduced, if the public finances are to be brought under control.
The Labour party wants to give the impression that their spending cuts would be nicer and fairer, but also wants the luxury of refusing to spell out what this actually means.
Until they do, Labour's message will not cut much ice with the voters.
In last night's Question Time programme the London Mayor put his finger on the message that Ed Miliband is trying to sell to the voters which is:
'Nicer Cuts Under Labour' - without of course explaining what this empty slogan means.
What the debate amongst the Question Time panel showed is that all the mainstream political parties agree that public spending must be reduced, if the public finances are to be brought under control.
The Labour party wants to give the impression that their spending cuts would be nicer and fairer, but also wants the luxury of refusing to spell out what this actually means.
Until they do, Labour's message will not cut much ice with the voters.
