Two-faced Danny: top Lib Dem puts the knife into Osborne
Yesterday, it was ‘a Lib Dem Budget’… today he’s pushing a ‘fairer way’ to deal with UK deficit
Danny Alexander, the Lib Dem Chief Secretary to the Treasury, appears two-faced today as he seeks to distance himself from yesterday’s Budget which (if you believe the Daily Mirror) will lead to a “bloodbath” of spending cuts on schools, the police, defence and the NHS.
Last night on the BBC’s News at Ten, Alexander, who represented the Lib Dems in putting together George Osborne’s package, hailed it as “a Lib Dem Budget”.
“This is a very Liberal Democrat Budget,” he said. “It was a Budget that raises taxes on tax avoiders and the best off and uses it to fund a bigger income tax cut for millions of working people. [The tax threshold is to rise to £10,800 and then £11,000.] This is absolutely a package we sign up to.”
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
But this morning, amid warnings that spending cuts will still be extraordinarily severe despite the Chancellor’s agreement to relax austerity measures towards the end of the next parliament, Alexander went on Radio 4’s Today programme to disown the consequences of the Budget and put the knife into Osborne.
“We [the Lib Dems] can deal with the deficit... but we can do so in a fairer way by allowing a substantial proportion of that to be carried out by tax measures to ensure the better off in society carry a substantial proportion of that… There is a big difference between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives about how you do that.”
Later today, Alexander will set out the alternative Lib Dem approach to cutting the deficit. They want higher tax increases on the rich - such as the mansion tax - and higher taxes on the banks than Osborne signed up to. They would also allow more borrowing to reduce the cuts in public investment in roads and railways.
The row is all about how painful the upcoming spending cuts are going to be.
Osborne announced yesterday he had reduced his forecast for a fiscal surplus by 2019-20 from £23bn to £7bn, in the hope of shooting Labour’s fox on public spending cuts.
But the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said Britain still faces spending cuts in 2016-17 and 2017-18 that will require “a much sharper squeeze on real spending… than anything seen over the past five years”. The OBR said the Budget “showed a rollercoaster profile for implied public service spending through the next Parliament”.
Treasury sources are furious with the OBR, insisting that it is wrong because it has not taken account of the fact that the figures have changed because of Osborne's decision to easing his target for a surplus.
Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, seized on the OBR report this morning, telling the Today programme that the Tory-Lib Dem coalition was “nasty and mean” to those relying on public services. “I will reverse deeper cuts. You have a Chancellor who wants deeper cuts in the next three years than we had in the last five years.”
So the election campaign now boils down to a simple question: who do you believe?
The Labour-supporting Daily Mirror warns this morning that the necessary cuts in public services will lead to a “bloodbath”.
John Rentoul in The Independent attacks Ed Miliband for failing to anticipate Osborne’s move to relax austerity measures, thus rowing back from taking public spending to the lowest level since the 1930s: “Labour cannot accuse Osborne any longer of wanting children to go to school without shoes in the sepia-tinted years before the NHS.”
Paul Johnson of the respected Institute for Fiscal Studies reckons the real difference between Labour and the Tories is about £25bn in cuts in public spending. You pays your money and you takes your choice.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Why Man United finally lost patience with ten Hag
Talking Point After another loss United sacked ten Hag in hopes of success in the Champion's League
By The Week UK Published
-
Who are the markets backing in the US election?
Talking Point Speculators are piling in on the Trump trade. A Harris victory would come as a surprise
By The Week UK Published
-
Crossword: November 3, 2024
The Week's daily crossword
By The Week Staff Published
-
What is the next Tory leader up against?
Today's Big Question Kemi Badenoch or Robert Jenrick will have to unify warring factions and win back disillusioned voters – without alienating the centre ground
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
What is Lammy hoping to achieve in China?
Today's Big Question Foreign secretary heads to Beijing as Labour seeks cooperation on global challenges and courts opportunities for trade and investment
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Britain about to 'boil over'?
Today's Big Question A message shared across far-right groups listed more than 30 potential targets for violence in the UK today
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
UK's Starmer slams 'far-right thuggery' at riots
Speed Read The anti-immigrant violence was spurred by false rumors that the suspect in the Southport knife attack was an immigrant
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The Tamils stranded on 'secretive' British island in Indian Ocean
Under the Radar Migrants 'unlawfully detained' since 2021 shipwreck on UK-controlled Diego Garcia, site of important US military base
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Britain's Labour Party wins in a landslide
Speed Read The Conservatives were unseated after 14 years of rule
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Will voter apathy and low turnout blight the election?
Today's Big Question Belief that result is 'foregone conclusion', or that politicians can't be trusted, could exacerbate long-term turnout decline
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published