Time for Labour to come clean over cuts
Gordon Brown continued to road test his "Labour spending versus Tory cuts" narrative , where he repeated his claim that the Tories would cut spending by 10%, even though the Tories (and many independent commentators) insist that 10% cuts are implicit in Mr Brown's own official figures (see the Budget Red Book and IFS calculations based on it).
Confirmation that there will be cuts whoever wins the next election comes from the , which argues that under Labour's existing spending plans there will be 350,000 job losses in the public sector over the next six years. The Institute's chief economist warns of a "bloodbath" in the public finances: "The fiscal squeeze implied by government plans (my italics) will result in 350,000 job cuts in the public sector between 2010/11 and 2014/15."
The unions are not buying the Brown narrative either. Unison general secretary Dave Prentis says he's his union gives to 64 Labour MPs vowing there would be no more "blank cheques" for Labour since it was pursuing "policies that are damaging our public services".
Yet Mr Brown and his Little Sir Echo (aka Ed Balls) maintain that only the Tories will cut spending by 10%. Mr Balls has gone even further, promising to ring fence not just health but education spending after 2011. Using the government's own figures that would imply cuts of 13.5% in all other government departments.
There are signs of a split -- or at least a difference in emphasis and tactics -- within the government. The Treasury pointedly refused to endorse Mr Balls' promise to increase education spending and there are reports that Chancellor Darling and Peter Mandelson (Lord of all He Surveys) would like to "come clean" about Labour spending plans but are being resisted by Mr Brown and Mr Balls.
This morning all the recent talk of green shoots of recovery are put into relief by the latest jobless figures: by 232,000 to 2.26 million in the three months to April.
Comments
or to comment.