« CCHQ launches 'Sorry from Gordon' website | Main | Conservative vice-chairman in Northern Ireland quits Tory-UUP joint committee »


"He is considering fiscally neutral reforms"

Oh, farking hell, I could just strangle Osborne.

Just when is the penny going to sink, and the roons stop playing yesterday's political games (ooh I mustn't offer tax relief as Labour will cry 'Tory cuts') and face up to the huge hole the UK is in?

Wow, when the tide does go out, when the Tories are actually in power, Osborne will be the first naked swimmer on view.

But at least Cameron will then be forced to put a competent Chancellor in place.

Absolutely right Tim. This must be the start of the honesty process not the beginning.

There are no surprises in what G.O. says. We dont need to be told that. We already know that.

What we do need, when the Conservatives are elected, is inspriational rhetoric. Nations can be re-build with grit and determination. Bringing out that grit and determination is key.

I meant to say of course not the end! Too early in the morning!

Does Osborne mention Dunkirk in his speech?

If we are going to be honest, why doesn't Osborne start with opposing the quantitative easing aka printing money to buy guilts aka printing movey to finance a bankrupt government.
It's the economics of the madhouse and being done by Brown fully in the knowledge that he won't have to clean up the mess. It's deeply immoral and we conservatives should very strongly oppose it.

Talk about scorched earth policy from Brown. This isn't just scorched it's burnt to a crisp.

He already said yesterday that "Anyone who tells you this plan [quantitative easing] will work, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about".

I think he needs to take his own advice and stop being the harbinger of doom about a future he cannot foresee.


Otherwise he'd have not been on that yacht with Lord Know Nothing Peter Mandelson!

Osborne is always trying to make political points. When one hears about people being laid off or knows friends who are having to work short time it is not political points one wants to hear. As for QE - is any other major country doing this or are we the only one of the developed nations? If nobody else is doing this why aren't the Tories asking the government why they are doing it but no other country is doing it?

I'm entirely fed up with being 'warned' about potential hazards by all and sundry, *We* know not to run with scissors; shame that the powers-that-be don't possess our wisdom. Perhaps Osborne would not be 'warning' us had the Tories opposed Brown's 'right thing to do' 'let's throw billions down a black hole' over the past 12 years (where did £682 on education go, for example?) let alone the latest fiasco with the banks, or had Osborne stood his ground last year when he said that we were in for a jolly tough time and was chided for 'unnecessarily worrying' the taxpayer. If he had stood to his guns then and the British watched the situation unfold, he would have been heralded as a savvy, shrewd operator. Having back-pedalled only to recapitulate the same message now makes him appear less than strong.

Mike from Brighton,

He did oppose it, as you will see from other replies. The problem is explained by John Redwood on his blog yesterday - that the BBC has a fixed policy on economics (Brown's or Balls') and doesn't publicise favourably those who disagree with it. This applies not only to economics but Europe and the myth of global warming.

If you start telling people that spending is going to be reduced and taxes are going to go up victory will not just be reduced it will disappear.
You can say that hard decisions will have to be made and it will be a tough few years but once through that we will be stronger but as for spelling out in detail what your going to have to do that is the road to disaster.
Perhaps if IDS had been a little less frank when he was leader and the editor was advising him he might have just gone on to be Prime Minister. Luckily I doubt if David Cameron will be foolish to listen to listen to such advice as IDS had.

Instead of all these "uncomfortable truths" - which I think most of us have known for a very long time - could we please debate John Redwood's blog yesterday: "The BBC isn't discussing alternatives to bailouts". We need to put forward some suggestions for dealing with the core problem - the reluctance of banks to lend - to show people that the conservatives do have some practical suggestions to improve things.

John Redwood has confirmed that he is quite happy for us or anybody else to print it.

"Britain is going to have to work hard and save hard to get out of this hole."

But British jobs won't be there for British workers, and as most of the jobs in recent years has gone to foreign workers how can we work hard to get out of the hole when we don't have the jobs?

"If you start telling people that spending is going to be reduced and taxes are going to go up victory will not just be reduced it will disappear".

That is exactly the same remark you made yesterday, Jack, and repetition doesn't make it any less wrong.

It is Gordon Brown who has promised to raise taxes to pay for his ever increasing pile of debt and it is Gordon Brown who has started cutting essential services.

We are aiming for the billions that Gordon Brown wastes each year in his crazy schemes that sound good in theory but which don't work in practice.

We have got to get rid of this man!

Who in their right mind is about to save hard?
I have done for 50 years, for what? I would have been better off spending the lot.
I am still waiting to hear what my party, The Conservatives are going to do about responsible people who provided for their retirement and are now in real hardship.
Nobody is willing to address this including Osbourne while we effectively pay the obscene 130% mortgages loaned by folk on £700K pensions that contributed to this situation.

No need for an apology David @09:33, it was well worth saying twice.

Brown just must go.

I see that you are laying down the platforma already for not increasing the State Pension by stating hard times ahead

Government is going to pains to tell us that; "The Bank of England is independent and it has taken this decision" in respect to its decision to print lots of money under a policy of Quantitative Easing (QE). Yvette Cooper, Treasury Secretary on Newsnight late last night almost hung on the words as she expressed clearly that QE was not a government decision.

Simultaneously Labour colleague Douglas Alexander, Labour's strategist and International Trade Secretary under Lord Know it all Mandelson said "The governor of the Bank of England decided today"...etc", in another Labour line which is so obviously seeking to position the government as 'blameless' if or more likely when, QE fails to work.

Yvette Cooper was also at pains to give us all a warning that unless other countries act in the same way, then it will have little or less value, and Douglas Alexander emphasised that "The Bank of England is responsible for monetary policy but government sets the parameters".

Talk about trying to dig yourselves out of a hold you dug for others!


I doubt there is ANYONE in the country who doesn't know this yet our side is not asking "WHY ARE YOU DIGGING THIS HOLE"!

We're in a "Global Economy" one minute and yet our government is taking action INDEPENDENTLY of all other nations. "HOW MANY OTHER COUNTRIES WILL BE DOING THIS" is a question G.Osborne should be asking!

If it's Labours trump card and it works (until election time), then what will he say then?

Why is he not demanding answers and demanding an election NOW?

The people won't be duped by spin or political positioning and I doubt the electorate wants to vote for a party which is part of this scam either. Certainly no one is likely to vote for tax increases, low inflation and massive falls in house prices either.

What policies does George Osborne actually have to drive the economy upwards please?

How will he accomplish anything without some intervention?

If he is against intervention then what is he good for?

If he is for intervention, then what kind is it and where would he intervene?

How does he plan to stabilise the housing market, or does he intend to actually do anything?

If he doesn't have a plan could he please say so, rather than telling people (who he doesn't know), that THEY will have to lose a lifetime of gains and work hard in his free market world which takes their jobs away without a politician in sight to stop it?


It's a pity so many Conservatives are banging on about what they see as George Osborne's Shortcomings. He is what he is, and he is what we've got, so why not give the man some backing?

He seems only too well aware that, when he becomes Chancellor (Oh please God let it be soon!), he is going to have to "open the books" to the people to show them just how bare the cupboard is. Some very unpalateable things are going to have to be done, particularly in shedding all of those "non-jobs" that statist Brown has created in the hope of grateful votes.

One hint from an old man at this end: Stop trying to restore the status quo. Look forward for new ways of doing things.

What exactly would we be backing Little Ern? Do you know?

I get the feeling that George Osborne is playing a waiting game rather than being bold and actually proposing the radical solutions, like large scale reductions in public spending and the tax breaks for business that are crucial for job creation.

There are so many questions that George Osborne needs to be putting to the British people. Such as can we afford a minimum wage and tax-credits anymore?

Can we afford to continue legislation that opposes mergers, sets conditions on working hours, that creates unnecessary, costly, bureaucratic health and safety and CRB regulations etc. All these barriers to job-creation have to be swept away if we are to get people back into work again.

George Osborne has to be careful that playing the waiting game doesn't lead to 'do nothing' accusations from Labour becoming a statement of fact.

When George Osborne was placed as Shadow Chancellor, it was at a time when "the markets ran it", and the Bank of England decided monetary policy, and the FSA regulated all manner of things including the kitchen sink.

George Osborne (like Brown), had no reason to doubt this would continue and that made his appointment "safe" as much of the decision making and oversight was not expected to be in his hands.

George Osborne didn't study economics he studied history. (Like Brown).

There is no basis to claim that a man (who has not made public any policies to mend the economy by essential management which is necessarily interventionist), can do any better job than the last bloke who made a right muck of it.

If and when he becomes Chancellor, what strategy will he take to mend the economy and our broken society?

If he make millions of people poor and wipes off tens and hundreds of thousands from their asset values, then how will he accomplish those policies?

ECONOMY - SOCIETY How will he improve these please, because we already know they are 'broken', and how will he restore faith in a system which doesn't work and is going 'global'?


Well, he has shown little aptitude for saying anything of substance let alone doing anything so far as I can recall. He is a mate of Dave's though who, as has already been mentioned has a liking for spending time with the likes of Mandy on a yacht entertained by a Russian billionair listening to indiscretions for later publication. What was he doing there I wonder has he ever said?
We need a heavyweight, an experienced person in this role, Osbourne is a waste of space

Super Blue:
Anybody who watched Andrew Mitchell on Question Time last night will have heard him express Conservative support for QE. So if we are 'opposing' we need to find spokesmen who say so.

I'm in agreement with Mike from Brighton, if we don't oppose the madness now, then in a year or two's time when it's all gone to pieces people will point out that we sat on our hands.

The Labour Government has done a lot of stupid things, but this time they've excelled themselves. Now is not the time to play political games with this to gain 'popular' advantage or for extra votes. It's time to replace strategy with integrity in this instance, before its too late.

John Redwood has said numerous times that he is unable to raise questions in the house about the governments decision making on the economy. WHY?

What's Parliament for?

Also, where does this leave the UK Govt with it’s Global Plan of co-operation when a firm in Europe, struggling to survive without access to loans, is unable to compete on equal terms when we’re supposed not to be taking protectionist actions alone?

Does everyone in politics think we're all stupid?

In that respect, the government has some explaining to do surely when it says we should avoid protectionism, gives our jobs away and then provides businesses with the very means to compete ‘unfairly’?

George Osborne unequivocally supports the use of QE at this moment in time.

From Conservatives.com:
"The Shadow Chancellor described the decision to effectively print more money as a “last resort”, necessary because of the “complete failure” of Labour’s other measures to tackle the recession..."This is a leap in the dark and we will see whether it works."

We'll see whether it works? Just, wait and see for a gamble of the magnitude? The man is an idiot.

Once again he is supporting the lunatic ideas of the government but will be first in the queue to attack the Government when they fail.

And, as if the comedy couldn't get any worse, at the bottom of the article, this is a link that says, 'Find Out about our plan for economic recovery'. Guess what the first item listed is? A two year council tax freeze. Yes, really!

Inch by painful inch Osborne edges towards talking sense. The public - And half this blog - still don;t comprehend the near terminal crisis we face.

See Iain Martin today in Telegraph (linked from front page)

The article by Iain Martin is a non-technical recital of the truth - the hard truth which we all must face and the sooner the better. Martin ends with the crux of the whole political situation “After a decade of being lied to, I suspect the Tories would be surprised at how eager the country is for truth.”

I think tony Makara is right - Osborne is sitting back playing for time - - disguised as a Baldrick ';cunning plan' of keeping his powder dry.

Things move so fast that specific policies would be silly. But he must come clean NOW and tell people how bad things are and stop supporting criminally dangerous government policies like QE [which gives away 10% of entire national income)

Super Blue: I'm extremely happy to stand corrected if the Conservatives are opposing the quantitative easing.
However I too watched QT last night and was left with the impression that Andrew Mitchell was supporting the QE?
I have the impression that Osborne is trying to triangulate - sit on his hands.
I hope you are right that we are opposing this lunacy from Brown and the BoE but I fear we are not. That I a committed Conservative activist am unsure what way we are falling on this decisive issue says it all.

Osborne please come out and strongly oppose QE. Give Brown the dividing line he desperately wants but we will find ourselves on the side of sanity. Time for principles not triangulation

" "Anyone who tells you this plan [quantitative easing] will work, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about"."

"The Shadow Chancellor described the decision to effectively print more money as a “last resort”, necessary because of the “complete failure” of Labour’s other measures to tackle the recession"

So Osborne has confirmed that he hasn't got a clue by supporting a policy he knows will fail?

Are the Tories now putting out diametrically opposing statements at the same time so they can quote the 'right' one in the future?

What was that about honesty...

Only the Tories can save the country.

And I think you are entirely wrong, Tim, to suggest that anything can be left till later.

The front bench have to speak up very loudly and very clearly, and they need to do it immediately.

Like the woman who threw the custard at Mandleson, many, many people are at the end of their teather with political parties and MPs completely failing to represent the peoples wishes (expenses, europe, immigration, taxpayer funded bailouts).

The front bench need to stand up and show that they despise the disaster that is the labour government every much as bit as the public do.

The front bench need to stand up and acknowledge that politics is not working for the people.

The front bench need to show that they can fix the gulf that we have between the people and the politicians.

It isn't just society that is broken, our political system is broken too.

If otherwise sensible people are throwing custard today as the only way to be heard - then far nastier substances are likely to follow - and then there will be no turning back.

Note: The lady is against the new runway - as are the tory party - but she still felt the need to take direct action. The opposition are failing to oppose in any real way. The tories need to connect with the people - not as a stunt for votes, but because the country is in huge danger if they dont.

"the government has some explaining to do surely when it says we should avoid protectionism"

Exactly, surely the first objective of British business should be to corner and dominate its domestic market, and the first objective of government should be to help British business to do that. Instead we get our government helping foreign business to knock British business out of business. All in the name of free-trade ideology.

If we are to emerge from this recession government has to stop giving foreign business the advantage over British business. We need to start by imposing a wage-equalization-tariff on nations that undercut British business with sweatshop labour. This will mean an end to cheap shoddy goods from the East, but will also mean that we can start produce quality goods and put our own people back to work.

Put British business and British workers first!

"Britain is going to have to work hard and save hard to get out of this hole."
Ian quotes this - is it from Osborne? Whoever uttered this cant drivel is a patronising reptile. Those of us - not a few either - who made a habit of both working and saving hard have been shafted by the political Establishment, treated with contempt, kicked in the teeth - by the limp-wristed eunuchs of the Conservative Party no less than by the crypto-Stalinists of Labour. I would be interested to see any remotely credible attempt to argue that at least ten percent of the House should not be executed forthwith, to encourage the others. It is stupefying to observe such a degree of lingering trust in these vermin, displayed on this site.

The signs are that the Tories are preparing the electorate.

This is a great step forward and handled carefully and with courageous policies I believe they will win 'real' support

A selective quote Chad. Osborne has been saying that QE is a desperate measure of last resort for some time.But as the BoE has tried everthing else without success what is the alternative?
I confess I don't know what to think. I've seen various respected City commentators praising this move but it doesn't seem right to me.
I and I suspect many others hope for the best but fear the worst.

Bernard Wright. The Conservative Party will not just not raise pensions they will cut things like social services and the health services that the old rely on because they would rather have there precious tax cuts then help those in need.

Malcolm Stevas, I wouldn't be opposed to the idea of politicians who consciously lie to the house being charged with treason and execution being an option. We don't make use of our treason laws enough.

Oh Tony Makara, you're a thoughtful man although we don't always agree. Don't fall to this level.

We are now retired. We only spent when we had the money , apart from the mortgage. WE saved and now a third of our income comes from interest on those saving - what income- we will soon spend capital which is OK if you know how long you are going to live!. Our private pension is not indexed linked and my husband worked an average of 14 hours a day 6/7 days a week on 24 hour call. Was it worth it! ! !

One of the many strengths David Cameron has is his optimism and the electorate like that in him. There is of course evy sane reason for the Tories to spell out the perils of the situation but sur4ely it must be done in such a way that Cameron can also assure the Country that we can and will pull through - but it just needs a fresh start and approach. Love him or loath him - but isn't that exactly what Obama managed to do.Just to bang on about the gravity of the situation (when for crying out loud most people know that already) and even worse to effectively say that the only answer is a slash and burn approach to public services, minimum wage, health and safety, tax credits etc etc is to lead this great Party of ours to utter doom at the next election and negates all that Cameron has tried so hard to achieve.

Surely the fact is that its a question of how fast the public debt can be reduced without destroying our public services. Thee is no absolutely right answer on that - its a matter of judgement. I thought (as usual) ken Clark spoke a lot of sense on TV on Sunday when asked about tax rises and cuts in public services when he said that all should be done to avoid tax rises and nothing should be done which would hold back recovery. Sounds sense to me and surely a good line for the election.

At the next election the voters will be promised by Labour a pain free recovery. Utterly false I know, but how tempting to the voters. If all we can say in response is "vote for us and you we will promise you real pain" then such political stupidity will deserve all it gets - a resounding raspberry from the Country.

Tell it like it is, for sure, but we do need to give the people the Cameron optimism as well. It is possible to honestly combine the two.

"Britain is going to have to work hard and save hard to get out of this hole."

Anyway haven't our politicains made it illegal for us to work for our collective interests as a country?

Just read George Osbourne's speech - the full text is on Green Box. That'll do for me - I think its excellent. Hits the right buttons, talks about the necessity of public service reform in order to PROTECT them amongst,the fact that the Toies will face up to the hard choices to be made and many other things. Well done George.

Ignore Jack Stone as our resident Socialist!!!

But since challenged by Malcolm Dunn at 1143 {"what is the alternative?") how about... Why is nobody suggesting that major cuts in taxation AND spending would be vastly less risky and would not incur the same massive debts for the future and would stimulate the whole economy. If interest rates were raised again savers - and NEW savers - would start saving again. This despair makes everything grind to a halt and we are heading for the plug hole.

As I have been saying for about a year or more, if we do not make cuts voluntarily they will be forced on us in the end by the IMF AFTER we have wrecked the country Anyone fancy that ??? (apart from Jack Stone of course!)


I do agree that it doesn't really matter what Osborne says now as he will have to do it for real next year and then all our warnings about him will come to pass.

I can wait for a competent Chancellor, I just hope that Britain can too.

The move reported in the FT will murder the venture capital industry, which relies on the tax-effectiveness of debt finance.

What a time to be screwing small or faltering companies over!

"The Conservative Party will not just not raise pensions they will cut things like social services and the health services that the old rely on because they would rather have there precious tax cuts then help those in need."

This is a silly argument. Anyone who knows anything about the business community will know that most companies have gone through several cost cutting exercises in the past few years. Such exercises are about increasing efficiency and not about reducing the level of service they provide to their customers.

Do you really believe there is no room for similar cost cutting exercises in the public sector? There was a story in the press yesterday about £7bn a year being spent on management consultants for starters. I know of at least one major public sector project where there were no cost controls over the project man-days.

The local council of my nearest city spent £7bn on re-paving the market square and another vast sum on a hideous art gallery and then lost £42m in the Icelandic banks.

The public sector needs a dose of salts to purge out all the waste and inefficiency. And on top of that someone needs to have the guts to tackle the public sector pension scandal. Why should the rest of us, many of whom have had their pensions ruined by NuLabour, have to work until we are 67 whilst contributing to the pensions of public sector workers who can retire at 60?

You may be right Christina.But George Bush's tax cuts did little for the US economy except to massively increase their deficit.
As I said earlier, I really don't know what to think.Mervyn King clearly believes in what he's doing but is that really a good recommendation?

Peter Buss at 1229 praises Osborne's speech. Having read it now my reaction is that If this were an academic lecture on economic philosophy I might agree.

But when the house is on fire and you're waiting for the fire brigade you save what you can, not sit down and discuss whether or not to go ahead with the loft extension.

He ought to have said "the government is risking the future of all of us with his insane gamble which is the last bolt he has in his licker because he's wedded to borrowing ever more to throw the money on the fire for future generations to pay back. The crashing mistakes they've made already jeopardise the welfare state and will force up taxation to pay off his debts. The public must know that life cannot be easy from now on. "

The man gets through a major speech without once mentioning the vast gamble Brown-Darling are taking with our country

There's a near terminal crisis on but he hasn't noticed. This confirrms that man should get out of politics and try and get a professorship somewhere. He's unfit to be Shadow Chancellor much less the real one.

There will have to be a shift away from funding providers to funding users of public services. We are proposing this in education, where schools will have to respond to their customers', the parents, many and varied demands. That will lead to competition and competition leads to efficiency and improved standards. The non-jobs will disappear over time.

If we took a similar approach to health and welfare, we could hypothecate NI payments to health insurance, (retaining a national ambulance and A&E service), employment protection insurance and pension contributions. People would choose, bad providers would fail. Money would be saved.

I believe we need a cash freeze in public spending totals for five years. That will reduce spending by a cumulative total of around £150bn, 50/50 that between tax cuts and debt reduction and we go some way to turning the corner. Tax cuts stimulate economic growth and we start to pull clear.

Yes, it is going to be tough and GO's speech - if read in full - is a good exposition of this. Pity it will be filletted and the least helpful soundbites used by the BBC.

Malcolm Dunn opines with nose in the air and head in the sand, " Don't fall to this level."
No, don't presume to be at all critical of the trahison des clercs perpetrated by the political class. Just roll over, tongue lapping and tail wagging, and let them do the same all over again. I don't know which is worse, career politicians or their toadies. As for those who seem reluctant to engage in a radical demolition of our bloated public services, in the face of overwhelming evidence of their unaffordability and destructiveness, it's difficult to believe such people are capable of crossing the road unassisted.

Any one experienced in businss knows what needs doing.
saying so now only meens labour will take those plans and screw them up royaly as they have done before.

continue to give them rope until four months before the general election and then reveal what needs to be done.
how the people will be taxed less and the national debt will start to be repaid.
how the infrastructure will be rebuilt, without the tax payer being gouged.

and how pwer will be removed from the unofficial officials within local goverment.
the quangos know their days are numbered, the fake charities know their days are numbered and the over paid oafs within the public sector controled business know their days are numbered.

if that doesn't work then pull the plug, let UK PLC flat line and start a fresh.

and as no one has already stated in this thread (sorry sally hehehe) leave the bleedin' EU yet remain trading ties with europe.

"Britain is going to have to work hard and save hard to get out of this hole."

And some British are going to have to save hard to get out of this hole we call the United Kingdom if someone doesn't stop blaming people rather than the *x!!"*'s who caused it.

Rugfish - You're just being silly! The people in the main wallowed in the cascade of goodies Blair-Brown dumped on them and voted repeatedly for MORE.

It's has got to stop but this lot won't - they just borrow more and the Tory Party doesn't even notice today of all days that we've entered the final phase.

Who is to blame ? The feckless useless generation who kept on voting for MORE! (And the useless politicians who caved in to them. Don't blame the bankers they were just the richer on es who DELIVERED the MORE as voted for!)

Absolutely Christina. Imagine the howls of complaints if politicians limited house price inflation to 1% max pa.

Everyone would be whining about their 'retirement pot' etc, politicians shouldn't rstrict with asset growth etc etc.

Posted by: christina Speight | March 06, 2009 at 14:09

I meant LABOUR not the bankers.
Brown's hopeless Chancellorship is to blame Christina and removal of the Bank of England from oversight and the implant of a bureaucratic dimwitted FSA Gestapo type outfit without a clue except where do we put the leisure facilities lads.

That's who I blame, not bankers who simply did what they were 'allowed to get away with'.

Bankers don't run the economy or make the rules or have any modicum of duty toward our society. They are there SOLELY to make a profit.

BROWN THE CLOWN HASN'T EVEN BEEN TACKLED BY GEORGIE PORGIE YET, and I'm not being silly, he plainly has not stuck the lance into Brown's side despite there's a ton of reasons to do so not least because the entire country rests on it.

>>Everyone would be whining about their 'retirement pot' etc, politicians shouldn't rstrict with asset growth etc etc.

And they'd be right. Politicians shouldn't restrict asset growth. Tampering with the markets by setting arbitrary 'levels' is a mistake.

Courts (not government) should enforce sensible lending. One leads to the other without needing to legislate directly.

My idea (mentioned once or twice before) is that if a lender can be shown to have lent irresponsibly; failing to properly analyse what can be afforded by the borrower or not bothering to even ask - the amount loaned will be written off in full by the courts.

The upshot - sensible practices by all lenders without heavy government interference or tampering in the markets. How many banks will lend irresponsibly if they know the result will be that they lose all the money? Not many...

Clearly if this QE malarky rests on people borrowing money and spending it, then someone should be telling Gordon Brown where to get off. - Enter: George Osborne MP.

Who should be saying "You do not really wanna do that Gordon".

What you wanna do is this...............(enter number of proposals then slag off Brown).

Include in such proposals, things what people would like to hear which will simultaneously do some good for the economy. Such things like: TAX REBATES - VAT off Home Improvements - VAT Moratorium on NEWS CARS, and 'kids sweets'. Okay, the kids sweets was a joke, but I think you get the picture. Also, whilst he's at it, he could mention that rather than giving banks more money, why not swap QE for shares in 'some' companies and offer some direct guarantees to construction companies in return for some WORK.

Rugfish - You were clearly NOT being silly - just guilty of misunderstood irony!

I agree totally that the politicians were to blame for not telling the truth to the feckless populace who just called out for more More MORE as they voted themselves into this mess. The bankers are the convenient scapegoats. In this scenario it is Brown Brown and BROWN who is the culprit - he was in charge and reveled in the false fame he was getting as he bribed the feckless people with their own money.

But with Osborne today there's no hope when we get rid of Brown for he hasn't noticed that a catastrophic event has occurred. What drug is he on ?

"What drug is he on" ?

christina Speight

Good question.

That's a start with the questioning then so now all we need is.........lol

Incidentally, I wonder how many people like me have kept from posting on this site more recently on account our tempers are too hot to remain patient?

It's like a visit to Madame Tussaurds watching these dummy politicians argue, but without the swords.

Malcolm Dunn, what we need is a balanced economy with sound public finances and the capacity to produce rather than playing the passive role with our services selling on the goods that other nations make. Specialization is a flawed concept because nations that are top-heavy in either services or manufacturing are dangerously exposed, putting all their eggs in one basket.

David Cameron has talked about creating a balanced economy and that is the right way to go. In many ways the recession might be a blessing in disguise as it allows us to sweep the deck clean and develop a new economy based on industry, apprenticeships and the concept of made-in-Britain.

My comment Tony, was based on you engaging with Malcolm Stevas regarding the execution of politicians.

chris southern | March 06, 2009 at 13:42

I believe it will take longer than 4 months to explain all the problems and the way to resolve them to the electorate.

Osborne has made a good start, slowly slowly etc and I am confident that the Electorate will welcome a reasoned and credible strategy to escape from this financial nightmare that Labour have put us in.

Richard Calhoun - But the silly little man is in the middle of a the greatest financial crisis possible, makes a major speech and doesn't even mention Darling's last throw of the dice before we're bankrupt. Haven't you noticed either ?

The only reason I have the slightest care about what others have borrowed/lent is because I seem to be expected to bail them out...

Stop the bailouts, and I can stop caring about (what should be) others peoples private business.

The governments job should not be prevent these things happening (because that is impossible), their job is to ensure that whatever happens, the innocent public are protected from it.

The tide will rise and fall however much money you throw at 'regulators' to control it -- so accept that fact and make sure you have a boat. Its easier, cheaper and the only sensible approach.

Unfortunately brown is smashing up our own private boats in further futile attemts to turn back the tide -- and the opposition just aren't as angry as they should be.

The reason they are not angry? Because they are standing on the bridge of the biggest boat (HMS Public Sector) watching us drown, probably thinking 'thank god its them instead of me'.

You seem to make one mistake here. The party should be about winning elections now not about just winning arguments. That is the trouble with to many people on this site they think if you tell the electorate exactly how it is they will vote for you they will not. People will only vote for you if they think you are firstly going to make things better for them and secondly you are going to improve the country.
It seems to me sometimes people forget that you can do nothing unless you are in power.
Also it seems to me that some people want to load all the reductions that have to be made in the debt burden on reductions in spending that is just not sensible. You will have to raise taxes as well. If you reduce spending by the amount that needs to be made you will have riots in the street.

Posted by: christina Speight | March 06, 2009 at 16:28Posted by: christina Speight | March 06, 2009 at 16:28

Christina, George Osborne is not in power, the Tories have come behind the problems as did everyone but they are getting their act together.

I am sure they will roll out a coherent programme in the next several months, educating and explaining to the electorate. It is the only way

"I get the feeling that George Osborne is playing a waiting game rather than being bold and actually proposing the radical solutions " T Makara

Tactically, thats just what he should do at this stage. This depression is unfolding with relentless force. Let Brown run around "saving the world" - he will simply engender yet more oporobrium. Rather as Hoover did in 1929-32 to the benefit of FDR.

Quite agree with you about the moronic "free trade" policy which the political class adhere to. We must the only country in the world which is blindly simplistic on this point.

Richard Calhoun at 17:22 You're as bad as Osborne.

My complaint is that he made a major economic speech and entirely ignored the elephant that's sitting on us all - Hadn't you noticed or have you your head in sand too ?

It could all be over bar the bailliffs 'in the next several months," . THIS IS NOW!!!

Free Trade is a great leveller and is to the benefit of the consumer.

If we had real free trade we wouldn't be needing to send Billions around the World in "Aid"


Posted by: christina Speight | March 06, 2009 at 17:42

Yes we all know that but this is going to run until May 2010 and until we attain Government we are not going to be able to change the course the Labour party are pursuing.

It is going to be vital to explain the solutions carefully to the electorate as we must have a mandate to carry out our policies

Richard Calhoun at 17:46
If he doesn't agree with this catastrophic QE policy he must say so NOW or he'll be quoted as agreeing.

If he does agree with it then we're finished anyway long before the election.


Posted by: christina Speight | March 06, 2009 at 17:42

Yes Christina I know but this saga is going to run until 2010 and nothing we can do to stop it.

We must however roll out a coherent strategy to deal with the financial crisis over the next few months that the electorate can understand.

Only then will we receive their mandate to carry out policies in probably the most difficult times since the 1930's

Apologies I didn't think the first comment had made it!!

Steve Tierney at 14.53:

"My idea (mentioned once or twice before) is that if a lender can be shown to have lent irresponsibly; failing to properly analyse what can be afforded by the borrower or not bothering to even ask - the amount loaned will be written off in full by the courts".

Steve, I agree with you. Not all that long after ConHome started up, about three and a half years, I guess, I started to criticise the level of debt in the country and suggested that the government should legislate against 'irresponsible lenders'.

I argued that any property you bought should be more 'a roof over your head' than an investment and wondered whether any mechanism could relate the market price of a property more closely to its intrinsic bricks and mortar value. I might have suggested that properties under £1 million should be restricted to no more than 10% above their insurance value.

My arguments were howled down by the free marketers and it was questioned whether I was even a conservative.

Today I visited a proper building society to discuss a mortgage for my son and the key consideration - today - was that any loan would not exceed 4.1 times his gross annual salary. I was delighted!

"Honesty about our intentions in government may reduce the scale of the Conservative victory but it will give us a much stronger mandate to start putting Britain right."

Tim, I totally agree with your analysis on this speech, but not the last prediction. If anything, it will increase the size of a Conservative victory, especially in our weaker area's over the last 20 years. And that is what will give a much stronger mandate to start putting Britain right.

Brown could have boxed clever politically if he had put his hands up and said sorry on a couple of individual issue’s like the FSA failure and the 10p tax back last Autumn, and when he was enjoying that wee bounce in the polls while he saved the world.
He should have then gone onto to have built his whole strategy around the idea that we *all* needed to take responsibility for the credit crunch, not just the bankers, and that it was down to all of us to work together to get through the recession.

That might have given that silly campaign Labour tried with the wartime comparisons more traction. But all Brown’s worst traits as a politician have been magnified as this economic crisis unfolded. He isn’t a good PM, because he is not a courageous politician. And right now, the public want a strong and honest PM.
Honest and strong enough to tell the truth about the reality and the painful measures which will be needed to combat it.
Osborne delivered a speech today, and its the one that Brown should have given six months ago, one that sadly, I knew he was incapable of giving despite being in such a precarious position in the polls.

Forget handshakes with Obama, relaunches and banking bailouts that are starting to resemble a Now music CD collection. If the Labour party had managed to elect a half decent politician to be our PM, they might not be sitting in such a big electoral hole right now.

Chris D "Osborne delivered a speech today, and its the one that Brown should have given six months ago"

Yes that's what this thread's about but it's far too late and the country ]s teetering on the edge of the abyss and Osboirne delivers a great speech for 2006 but not for today when Darling has thrown the dice for the last time and it won't work and Osborne doesn't notice or comment.

The crass stupidity is unbelievable!

Christina, calm down and read that comment again in the context of my post and the point I was making!
And as for Osborne not noticing Darling's last throw of the dice, you obviously missed all over the media yesterday commenting on it.

God, with Cabinet Ministers called Darling and Balls, I feel like we are writing an episode of Blackadder rather than talking about the government. Joking aside, or maybe not?

Come off it, ChrisD. When my country is collapsing it's not appropriate to 'calm down'. Calming Down is for those who are still blissfully unaware of what's in store. Count me out of that one!

How could anybody in this terminal phase of our country and who has pretensions to become Chancellor go out and make a major speech taking weeks of crafting without even mentioning ONCE that Darling has bet everything we possess on a dodgy premise.

Yes "the media yesterday [were] commenting on it." but what in the name of heaven is Osborne's view about it ?

What's the matter with so many bloggers that can't get that idea into their head ????

Despair - of a non party kind - is the only logical response.

We will win the election if we deserve to and that will be the case if we win the arguments. Jock Stale says that this is unimportant because he doesn't want us to win!


You will find that we will all still be here in a month's time and the Tories will be refining their policies to deal with this mess.
It is too serious to respond off the cuff, we are in uncharted waters and I am pleased to note that it appears the Tories are ensuring they have the best advice on the policies that will be needed for this unfolding catastrophe!!

PS Have a look at this link - evidence of a contrived "real" name?


Malcolm Dunn, I see your point. Of course I do not follow Malcolm Stevas line about executing politicians simply for failure. However I feel there ought to be a charge of treason brought against any politician who consciously lies or brings falsified information before the house.

Naturally the response ought to fit the severity of the case in hand and we would have to reply on the skill of our judges to decide which level of punishment would be appropriate. Nontheless, a custodial sentence and even capital punishment should be an option in the most extreme cases.

Isn't this getting exciting! At last folk seem to be getting a little fire in their bellies.
Congratulations go to Christina.

" I do not follow Malcolm Stevas line about executing politicians simply for failure."
This is a travesty. The political classes have made us into one of the most heavily taxed people in the world, the most surveilled, the most encumbered with oppressive bureaucracy and pettifogging officialdom; they have permitted and encouraged the inward migration of vast numbers of people from alien cultures, people who despise our values and have no intention of integrating; they've taken the culture, traditional liberties and the wealth of this country, and flushed them down the toilet. Execution's too good for them. If you're not angry, you haven't the faintest idea what's going on.

"the moronic "free trade" policy which the political class adhere to. We must the only country in the world which is blindly simplistic on this point"

Jake, spot on. The silence that greeted Brown when he raged about protectionism in the States just goes to show how far the British political elite are behind on this issue. The very idea that we should suffer millions on the dole so that China is free to take over our home market is obscene. We will only put people back to work when we are producing these goods ourselves. The Americans quite rightly see that as the way forward.

Malcolm Stevas, I think we all share your frustrations with the modern breed of career-politicians. Selection processes have to change if we are to get people of substance and honesty into political life.

Has anybody bothered to look at the effects of the pusilanimous approach of Osborne et al in actual ballot boxes?

On Thursday we lost two local council seats, one to Labour and one to Lib Dems largely because of a desertion by voters of the Tory candidates to the BNP.

By sticking to the overt support for much of what the Government is doing (I notice Philip Hammond was doing it too on the BBC when interviewed on the 0.5% Bank Rate) we are beginning to lose support to the extreme right.

Time for Dave to wake up and smell the coffee!

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker