Wednesday, 10 June 2009

Help Needed

Someone help me out here. John Denham MP and Philip Hammond MP are on Newsnight arguing about how Labour and Tories will NOT be cutting public expenditure, and in fact increasing health spending.
Is there anyone in the country anywhere, who is not a Labour tribalist, that thinks that public expenditure can continue at the current level?
And Denham is boasting that they have doubled public expenditure, that is doubling taxes, since 1997. Same question. Is there anyone out there, excepting Labour tribalists, that still thinks this is a Good Thing?
It is transparently clear that we cannot as a Nation go on taxing, spending and borrowing to support out standard of living, so why, just why, cannot we move this debate on to an argument as to how we can do all this stuff for less fucking money? Why have New Labour been allowed to get away with setting the terms of the argument?
This is so depressing. We are getting stuck in a box between a choice of party A that wants to carry on spending truly epic amounts of our money badly and Party B that wants to spend a slightly less epic amount of our money badly.
It's no wonder that UK industry is so high cost when 50% of our income is spent by the State and of which I reckon at least 50% is wasted.
PS. I realise that the Tories 'increasing spending on health' is not at all the same thing as saying 'increasing spending on the NHS'.


Mark Wadsworth said...

It's Indian Bicycle Marketing from Hell.

On the telly just now, the BBC were asking Andy Burnham whether Labour spending reduction plans would mean cuts in policemen or soldiers, which Andy B duly dodged.

That was the wrong question.

A better question would have been, "Will you cut spending on the Regional Health Partnerships Network or on the Local Community Awareness Programme?"

(OK, I made up these Quangos, but you get my drift).

But this all rams home the false message that spending cuts = making things worse for John Q Taxpayer.

J Bonington Jagworth said...

"I made up these Quangos"

I wouldn't have known! The problem in all bureaucracies is that when cuts are made, it is always the people at the sharp end who lose their jobs, while far more money would be saved (with less impact on the service) if unnecessary layers of management were removed. This doesn't happen because the cuts are administered by the same people who should be falling on their swords...

J Bonington Jagworth said...

BTW, I'd love to have heard that question, followed up by the admission that the quangos were invented!

Oldrightie said...

Every day for the weeks remaining to a GE, bloggers must keep up the pressure to dump this pig ignorant Labour Party. They need to be destroyed and a decent party rise out of the ashes. Whilst that takes place we monitor a Tory Government and LibDem opposition. Well we can hope, can't we?