Cameron-Osborne's bravest decision

It was Cameron-Osborne's biggest and loneliest decision: The decision to oppose Labour's plans to borrow and spend Britain's way out of recession.  When the Tory leadership team took the decision they were first big political party in the world to step away from the herd.

It's a decision that doesn't look so lonely today.  America's Republicans - albeit for mixed reasons - are opposing Barack Obama's stimulus.  As reported on ConservativeInternational, Australia's Liberals are now stimulus-sceptic too.  I think Angela Merkel and Stephen Harper would have been less willing to support a stimulus if they weren't leading minority governments.  Harper has certainly enraged his Canadian Conservative base for having done so.

When the Angry Right accuses David Cameron of leading Britain towards socialism they should reflect on this big Tory call.  It's true that we still need much, much tougher control of public spending from the Conservatives but their fiscally conservative instincts are strong.

Tim Montgomerie

10.15am: "Paris rejects 'Obama-style' stimulus program" (International Herald Tribune).

Comments

[Jiggy]

I don't see why republicans would disagree with Obama's bailout. Last time I checked, Bush was the one who proposed it. Then again, why would republicans agree with a political agenda as big as this? It all boils down to mindless opposition, all because the other side is expected to "oppose."

[GB£.com]

What are you talking about?

They fully supported the biggest waste of money, the bank bail-out, and even claimed credit for coming up with the idea.

That stupid decision alone will take decades to pay off.

[Steve Foley]

If Conservatism is nothing more than an Economic Philosophy then Tim may have a point.

Of course Cameron and Osborne, two poor little rich boys, have no fear of the spectres of Unemployment, Repossession etc. Typical alas of the modern Conservative Party these days Economically Hard but soft as putty on Social matters.

No wonder so many true Tories have gone to other parties.

[Sane Right]

"Angry Right" is putting it mildly. This is the "deranged, chewing the carpet Right" that has no place in today's Conservative Party.

[John Broughton]

The Cameron-Osborne decision not to borrow and spend was and remains both right and correct.

However to make it work it has to be coupled with restoring sanity to the public finances and making cuts. Local Authorities could for instance be obliged to provide only the core services. Proper local democracy needs to be restored with dependance on central funding reduced where high spending councils will then be voted from office.

The current approach to private sector finance whereby interest rates are being reduced to virtually zero penalises savers in favour of the profligate (goodness knows but the benefit system already does that). Base rate cuts are not going to save private enterprise - the + over is what matters. A lot of people used the interest on their savings to survive; give them back their income and they will spend rather than starve and freeze.

I'm looking for a more coherent financial plan.

[Susan Hill]

But when push comes to shove NO government of either side ever does cut public spending in the way every person in the street knows it should be cut - and knows exactly where and how too. They all chicken out. The above comment is correct... make local councils provide and provide well, ONLY core services...our recently appointed a Climate Change officer on 23k a year for heaven`s sake, to write patronising and ignorant leaflets and shove them through my door, at huge expense. And we all know that when there are cuts it is always the core frontline services that suffer first, whereas town hall jobs are secured.
But will the Conservatives under Cameron have the guts to cut deeply in the right areas ? No, of course they won`t.

[David Belchamber]

"I'm looking for a more coherent financial plan". John Broughton

I think we all are, John. As Brown and the conservatives were fully aware of what Sweden did successfully in the 1990s when faced with a similar problem, I am surprised that they do not seem to have debated the merits of creating a "bad bank" to take over the toxic assets from the the main banks.

I suggested that idea on ConHome back in November when it received nil interest but it is now being actively discussed by Germany, the USA and ourselves as a serious possibility.

The conservatives can muster quite a lot of economic firepower - several former chancellors, John Redwood, Michael Fallon, Peter Lilley (who correctly predicted in 1997 the problems that Brown's actions would cause in a downturn) and Howard Flight to name several. Did they have a think-in to come up with a better plan than Gordon Brown's and, if not, why not?

[UKIP defector]

It looks like CCHQ is putting the heat on the Editors. Is there a threat to withdraw the puff pieces from frontbenchers?

This piece is sychophantic nonsense as Cameron has, in effect, declared his Conservatism to be a new form of Keynesianism.

I expected from the supposedly independent Conservative Home. Show some testicular fortitude guys!

[Tim Montgomerie]

We haven't been subject to any pressure or threats UKIP defector. Yesterday I questioned Tory environmental strategy. Last week I questioned the willingness of two shadow cabinet ministers to sign up to the 'Red Toryism board'. ConHome remains a proudly independent forum.

I do think the opposition to a stimulus was the right call. I don't think it was an easy decision at the time. I was certainly in two minds myself.

[James Maskell]

I thought the Tories were wedded to Labours spending plans and supported Labours policies regarding the recession until they realised it was a ridiculously unpopular policy which would lead to a loss of support. Their opposition was based upon the realisation that their stance at the time was unsustainable and that they had fallen into line at the start under the apparent pretence of national unity. It was only when they realised they were on the wrong side of the argument that they changed.

Recent comments by Cameron suggest that theres still a lot of smoke around regarding Tory economic policy.

[UKIP defector]

I accept the Editor's personal assurances and apologise for the rather intemperate remark above.

It's not much fun being snowed in, and unable to get to the office, for a third day in succession. You could say it's snow good.

[Chuck Berry]

I just wish the stimulus for the economy would centre around the building of new Public Conveniences. Healthmatic a great business (My Lord! I must declare an interest) would be delighted to put even more in to increase its already record installation performance. www.healthmatic.com someone has to do it!

Chuck

[Ther Bishop's loyal wife.]

It's appears to me that the far right has become even more disloyal than usual.

Steve Foley says " No wonder so many true Tories have gone to other parties." No "true" Tory would leave the party. A "true" Tory will bite his or her tongue, and buckle under in the interest of party unity and winning the next general election.
Those who cannot be loyal members of the party, should indeed go elsewhere.Please stop trying to justify their treason, and do not describe them as "true" Tories.

[david1]

An opposition can indulge in all sorts of,'brave decisions' its having the courage to impose them when in government that counts.

So will Mr Cameron/Osborne make it clear in the Conservative manifesto, that they will do a Howe/81, substantial rise in taxes and reduction of public spending during a recession: somehow I dont think so!

[Westminster Wolf]

France too:

"Prime Minister François Fillon on Monday rejected demands that the French government seek to stimulate consumer spending, rather than follow his plan to stimulate corporate and infrastructure investment, to lift France out of its economic slump.

"It would be irresponsible to chose another policy, which would increase our country's indebtedness without having more infrastructure and increased competitiveness in the end," Fillon said in a speech in Lyon."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/02/business/frecon.php

[GB£.com]

Tim wrote:
"When the Angry Right accuses David Cameron of leading Britain towards socialism "

Andrew Lilico wrote:
" I can hardly complain when our policy proposals are nakedly socialist"

So Tim, by your own definition, you are now insulting Andrew as "Angry Right".

[m dowding]

A "true" Tory will bite his or her tongue, and buckle under in the interest of party unity and winning the next general election...

--------------------
Well said. Toeing the line in opposition and being constuctively critical in power is the way to go.

[anne allan]

Talking of public spending cuts - now that a public sector employee earns more on average than his or her counterpart in private companies they should share the risks that a job in the productive part of the workforce entails.
Council planning departments all over the country are twiddling their thumbs. A few redundancies/natural wastage wouldn't come amiss.

[Ben Drown]

"10.15am: "Paris rejects 'Obama-style' stimulus program" (International Herald Tribune)."

Paris Hilton has come out against the Obama stimulus? This merits an article in its own right.

[Jack Iddon]

Oh dear Loyal Wife. Is disloyal to be dismayed when you see the party that you have worked and striven for most of your adult life lose it's way, change its identity, slowly slipping to the left and abandoning the true Conservative principals and standards for Blairite emulation and dithering indecision. Was it this that made the Conservatives such a great party?
Our callow leaders, Cameron and Osbourne are the greatest asset Browne has in his electoral armory. That is why some people have left. Despair not disloyalty has driven them out!

[Mark]

LEVEES & LEVYS
Brave decision or not, there needs to be strong opposition to the prevailing political wind. The storm, to be faced at election time, will surely require plans of action to quell the resultant fires and to build defences against the rising tide - to construct levees which will protect UK interests whilst enabling trade to pass through.
Yet it is the levy that the unthinking Government is placing on future generations which needs to be the focus. Avoiding the pending and feared protectionism that appears to be developing worldwide is one thing. But we are actually talking about UK survival. Using Darwinian thinking, those who learn to best adapt survive.
The Conservatives must not only be brave - they must prove that they are adapting best to the climate we now face.
The sooner the election, the sonner the right corrective measures can be applied. This will take a lot of thinking through - but only the Conservatives have the right platform. This is the thinking man's platform.