An excellent column by William Rees-Mogg in The Times that takes George Osborne to task for promising to match Labour's spending plans until 2010/11. Encouraging Mr Osborne not to renew this me-tooism is one of ConservativeHome's campaigns for 2008.
Rees-Mogg lists a number of reasons why the Shadow Chancellor is wrong:
- "In 2010 whoever wins the general election will probably have to make a choice between higher taxes and cuts in expenditure. The commitment to Labour spending plans could therefore become a commitment to higher taxes to pay for the spending. The Tories can't afford to become the high tax party."
- "I would be pessimistic about the economic prospect in the next two years; I expect there to be a downturn in the US and here. If it does happen, unemployment will rise, government spending will rise, but revenues will fall. In those circumstances, it would be quite ridiculous for a Conservative government to be committed to spending plans that might become wholly inappropriate."
- "Only if we now enjoy a couple of years of stable prosperity would it be prudent to commit to Labour spending plans. Yet if there were to be a couple of years of prosperity under Labour, it is unlikely the Conservatives would win a general election."
Over at The Spectator's Coffee House, Fraser Nelson also encourages the Tories to break free from Labour's spending plans. Yesterday, John Redwood gave some advice on how to trim Britain's biggest peacetime increase in spending.
Recent Comments