Does Mr Cameron support David Davis' tax approach... or not?

Earlier this morning a spokesman for Mr Cameron said:

"David Cameron has consistently argued that the proceeds of economic growth should be shared between tax cuts and investment in public services and that a dynamic economy needs competitive tax rates.  It is encouraging to see that David Davis has now confirmed he supports that approach and that there is a lot of common ground between them on this issue.''

And then, according to PA:

"Conservative leadership candidate David Cameron arrived at a meeting with Tory faithfuls today saying it was not "sensible'' to promise tax cuts so long before a general election.  Mr Cameron, in Tory safe-seat Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex, was referring to leadership rival David Davis's pledge today to cut taxes by £30 billion if he is elected as prime minister.

When asked about his views on Mr Davis's tax cut pledge, which he claimed would save the average family £1,200 a year, Mr Cameron said: "I do not think it is sensible to outline such proposals four years before an election.  We cannot know the exact state the economy will be in, and whether or not it will be growing or shrinking. I do not think that is the right approach. These suggestions were made last time and they didn't seem to have much success.''

Speaking briefly as he entered the meeting with Tory members and other members of the public, Mr Cameron said the country needed a "dynamic and competitive economy'' in which the proceeds of growth should be shared between "tax reduction and extra public investment''."

I take it 'not'.

Comments

[Selsdon Man]

"First, Davis has not "made up" his numbers. They come from applying his "Growth Rule"- which itself calls not for 1%pa absolute spending growth, but 1%pa LESS than trend GDP growth. So on the basis of 2.5%pa trend GDP growth, we get 1.5%pa spending growth."

That is a TAX INCREASE(on current spending plans) rather than a tax cut. It is very similar to Letwin's election policy, i.e. merely a reduction on Brown's plans. DD is using the same ploy as Blair used to criticised us at the general election. DD's team should be honest and admit that DD will RAISE TAXES.

[Wat Tyler]

Sorry Selsdon...DD is proposing a cut in tax rates from what we will inherit, and a cut in the tax percentage of GDP. How is that an increase?

[Selsdon Man]

It is an increase on the taxes that we pay now! Simple!

[Sean Fear]

The figure that counts Selsdon Man, is tax as a proportion of GDP. Our problem at the last election was that we were promising that taxes would be higher, as a proportion of GDP, in four years time than they are now.

[Selsdon Man]

Davis is merely advocating applying the Letwin principle in four to five years time, i.e. accepting the tax and spending increases that will be applied before then.

If you reduce government spending in real terms, taxes should fall faster than economic growth. That would give us the opportunity to cut taxes to below current levels.

[Henry Cook]

At the last election, we promised to spend 40% of GDP. Davis is promising to spend 40% of GDP. The difference is that Davis is ignoring the need to tackle Brown's borrowing - we said at the election that £8 billion would be spent on reducing borrowing, £4 billion on taxes. The £12 billion combined which we said we would take away from spending will rise to a figure of £38 billion by 2014 (if we believe that growth rates will stick rigidly to the treasury's predictions. I think it would be silly to make such an assertion, we all know the economy is slowing down.)

Davis is proposing to raise the overall amount taken in tax - it will go up as a result of growth, and only much larger taxes than he is proposing would reduce the tax take.

[buxtehude]

Well, this has been an interesting debate. But the part that I find a bit silly is the assumption that Cameron is a vote-winner, and DD is not, on the basis of a very brief untesting time.

What is clear, I freely admit, is that DD has been disappointing, unconvincing. But I think he works as well as Thatcher did (don't forget how she struggled just to get her TV image up to mediocre - the legendary 'presence' came later).

Yes, DC is a very good performer, and I hope he does well. I just want to feel more certain that he's not a 'stars-in-their-eyes' Blair-imitator - albeit a very good one - who will look a bit silly once he's been given a proper media bashing. Just look at the cover of Private Eye at the moment and see how easily he can be made to look a twat (just like everyone else - I don't mean that to be insulting).

[Oberon Houston]

Well well, there are some corkers in this one.

"doesn't matter if you lose, its principles that matter"

I happen to think that what matters us what actually happens. What has happened us labour have won three elections and the Tory party would have polled more votes if it had said nothing at all. Yet here we are talking about tax cuts, pressuring a leadership contender to make unpopular remarks and flicking two fingers to public opinion. Oh dear me, nurse! More asprin!

[henry curteis]

people will always vote for motherhood and apple pie, so I guess Conservatives who want to win power will support policies advocating these two.

I am not so sure as buxtehude that Labour won the last election. Only if they can maintain their postal vote that is the approx 4.5 million of their total 9.5 million votes that were acquired postally will they ahem! win again. Why are Conservatives not demanding a change to the postal voting system if they claim they wish to win an election at some point in the future. At the polling booth labour were convincingly beaten.

tax cuts are surely secondary to the postal voting sums.