Coffee House poll: should the Tories pledge to cut public spending?

Bernard from Horsham

To me this is a difficult call, Everyone knows public spending is too high, but to say public spending will be cut will lead all sorts of Labour claims that are not true.
I would keep my powder dry till close to the election. I can live with 20% plus poll leads for now.
A lot of research will be needed in how to present the sweeping away of Labour's extravagances.
Such spending will only get higher before the election as Gordo scorches the earth.

Difficuly call, bur powder dry for now

TrevorH

Who knows what the economy will be like in 2 years??

mckenzie

Make this pledge at your own peril, that's all I am saying.

MartinW

I voted 'no' for the simple reason that pledging to cut public spending would give our political opponents wonderful ammunition - you can hear the cries of "the tories are going to cut health, education, pensioners' benefits, and so on". It is, of course, essential to curb public spending, but also essential not to announce it beforehand.

Slim Jim

It's not enough to say they will make 'cuts'. The Tories must highlight the areas of public expenditure that can be trimmed back without affecting delivery. Quangos would be a good start. Whilst they're at it, they could remind Brown what he said about them whilst in opposition...

I'm sure a slick operator like the Young Cameron can 'sell' us the reduction of wasteful expenditure whilst highlighting the continuation of efficient services. It might be a good time to resurrect the three 'E's - Efficiency, effectiveness and economy. Then convince people that such 'cuts' actually mean more money in their pockets that they can decide what to do with, not the state. Now there's a narrative in the making!

Nicholas

A pledge like this would be followed by a wave of accusations that the Tories were going to cut public investment in "skoolz'n'hospitalz" from every Lefty and every Lefty Subversion Cell in the land including that paragon of impartiality - the BBC.

First, I think the Tories to look long and hard for a way to counter New Labour's media grip. Then the means to communicate New Labour waste in a clearer message than they have so far done. They need to zero in on quango land, dissecting the cost vs the results with a few emotional soundbites from real people who have run up against these Peoples Politburos.

Currently they don't have the voice and when they do have it either the New Labour/Media conspiracy misrepresents it or the government pinches the idea.

idle

You pose the wrong question.

"Given current economic circumstances, should the Tories abandon their commitment to increase public spending?"

PayDirt

Pledging to cut public spending only loses votes. The clear aim of the next government should be growth in the economy. With a split in those who set the interest rates, can’t decide whether to cut or raise, obviously the supposed economic experts don’t know how to right the ship. Where to spend, now that’s more like a field of play where the Tories could do some pledging. What does the country need? For a start how about: houses for first-time buyers, first-time buyers, discipline in school, decent wages for a decent day’s work, deterrence for anti-social behaviour, etc etc.

Verity

I agree with those who proposed cuts in quangoland as a strong option. No one knows what on earth these quangoes do, why they are so priviled, and why we are the only country with such an elephantine and undemocratic aberration. I doubt the people living in subsised housing would be up in arms about saving quangoes.

Most interesting though, is, among the poll-takers, one per cent marked "Don't know". Why on earth take a poll when you have no idea to express?

Verity

PayDirt - Sounds like an ideal socialist environment. Let the market find realistic ways of wooing first-time buyers.

Get the government the hell out of the school system and let the ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD of each school district determine standards of behaviour and discpline. It has worked for generations in the US.

Let the market decide what is a "decent" wage for a decent day's work. It's not the government's bloody business. Your notion is made even more grotesque by the fact that no one in the current government has ever done a day's work in the private sector and the free market is a foreign country to them.

Deterrence for anti-social behaviour. Yes, indeed. Elected local mayors with real power. Get the fresh winds of liberty and enterpise blowing through Britain and let them blow away the stench of big, bullying, controlling government.

Alan Phillips

I think the line that needs to highlight the new debt that is being introduced, how it's being borrowed from funds that should have been put away. Mention that its really difficult to commit to spending plans until this government can give the assurances that no further uncosted borrowing is needed.

Mention there will be a root and branch audit of the public books to both identify the real scale of the debt that the country has been landed with AGAIN. Also identify the easy savings from quango wastage and in other area's and drop the sharing the proceeds of growth mantra and adopt a "delivering value for YOUR money" message instead. A final point to deliver to the "proud people of the United Kingdom" is that we work to reinstate values that reward work, savings, marriage and honesty.

Workers will keep hold of their money and not have to apply for tax credits. Savers will a taxable allowence set aside for pension contributions. People who are married get a taxable allowence. And to see a clampdown on insurance and mot dodgers by having a valid disc for each of these. The fines will be at a rate that would make avoidence economically much worse off, rather than a £100 fine for not having £600 insurance.

ColinR

To say "leave it until nearer the election" misses the point. Here's why;

It's self evident that spending has to be cut, but unless there is an effective way of communicating with the electorate - and one every bit as effective as new Labour has - then fighting the forthcoming election is in itself an exercise in futility.

Job number one - aside from properly thought out policies - is communication...not dumbed down "newspeak"..but a coherent series of statements concerning how/what/why/when. This surely cannot be a task which is beyond the abilities of the Conservative Party?

As one more than one commenter pointed out, announcing spending cuts without being on message about the "four W's" is asking for trouble, but the time for a future leader to begin explaining his vision, and the underlying reasons is now, because there is time to fully explain the details.

If this is done intelligently (and there would be a sea change indeed!) and honestly (ditto!) then you rob Labour of the opportunity - and more importantly the material - to take "cheap shots" and play the old alarm game.

Spending absolutely must be cut, and this abhorrent phenomenon of "quango's" would - among many others - be an ideal starting point. (I've been out of the UK for over 30 years, and had to resort to the Urban Dictionary in order to obtain a definition of the term!)

Thus, I contend, given that a method exists to explain the vision of the party during the years to come, the time should be now.

BUT

It is time for candour, a straightforward approach, and coherence. Absent any one of these then whatever message is sent to the electorate will not be heard as it was intended. Governments fall on less than that, parties fail to be elected for less reason than that.

Ask yourself if the stakes are high enough that, if this issue is handled wrongly, you might wind up with another Labour Government. Is that something that the country can withstand politically, economically and socially? I - for one - tend to believe that it cannot.

John Ashton

There's very little difference between Islington and Notting Hill.
Both self satisfied and smug with little link to the working public.
I'm uncertain as to why everyone gets so het up on policies. After all it is Brussels who makes those. Westminster is only in charge of meddling in the affairs of individuals

PayDirt

Verity
"Let the market decide what is a "decent" wage for a decent day's work. It's not the government's bloody business"

Is the reason why a lot of voters in UK don't vote Conservative. It is the Govt's business. My point was actually about decent day's work: paying people not to work is a vote-loser, ranting on about the wonders of the market is also a vote-loser? (It loses mine anyway.)

JimBob

Start off by getting rid of Beeb, the aristocracy, etc that'll save a few bob

The Laughing Cavalier

The only honest thing that Conservatives can say at the moment is that when elected they will examine the books. They should say also that they expect to find an almighty mess need to see just how bad things are before they decide what can be done.

Verity

PayDirt, "Is the reason why a lot of voters in UK don't vote Conservative."

They don't vote "conservative" because there is no conservative message and no conservative party.

The market will decide what's a fair day's pay, not a vote-seeking parasite.

OK, PayDirt, talk of economic liberty loses your vote. So adios already.

Neil

Spend it on Trident. Spend it on defence and guns and world blower upers! Support the US! Support Israel. Smash the unions! Smash the working class! Support the Rich! Support inherited wealth. Continue to support he QUANGOS full of the ruling class that WE SET UP under Thatcher. Should I carry on? You lot make me sick!

Athesius the Facilitator

I voted No they shouldn't but I want them to really. The trouble with promising Tax cuts is they give the Labour party a stick to beat them with. Don't promise anything, except giving value for money, and the next election is in the bag for the Tory's

floatingvoter

I also voted no though I do want them to cut public spending if it means lower taxes. Actually it would be reasonable to cut the numerous money sucking social policies that seem to do little good.

John Miller

The economy is out of control, Labour is fermenting like a barrel of rotten apples, oil prices are fluctuating daily, Labour steals Tory plans wholesale, banks rights issues are taken up virtually exclusively by other banks - and someone wants the Tory party to tell us NOW what they are going to do in TWO YEARS time?

Just ask yourself where YOU will be shopping and what YOU will be spending in two years time. Then make me a promise, which I (or my nasty neighbour) will hold you to. Doesn't matter if in those two years you have been made redundant, or your car's blown up, or your house has been flooded. We will still hold you to your promises. Now do you see the problem?

BCS

No government in modern British history has actually cut pulbic spending. Hardly any (certainly not Thatcher's) even reduced it as a proportion of GDP. The Tory ideologues need a dose of reality.

Bernard from Horsham

Athesius the Facilitator
August 25th, 2008 7:07pm

I voted No they shouldn't but I want them to really. The trouble with promising Tax cuts is they give the Labour party a stick to beat them with. Don't promise anything, except giving value for money, and the next election is in the bag for the Tory's

THe best post by a wide margin. Value for money should be the Tory slogan Something simple to sell as an idea and difficult to argue against, (Labour will say it is value for money and it will be easily demonstrable that it isnt

Hereford

Be specific. Announce a 20% reduction in the Civil Service in Central Government Departments over a period of 5 years. Nobody will notice the difference.

Rex Burr

If the market doesn't need those in the gutter it will leave them there.
If a company can make a good living while not including first time buyers then why should it care? The market price of land will ensure that no other organisation can address the issue either.

Tim Carpenter LPUK

I can imagine some would baulk at not promising tax cuts until the books are handed over, but to not cut SPENDING?

Yes, it will cause uproar and "ammunition", but surely the Tories should be able to respond and create a debate, to face this one down. BTW it is not even "government spending" but "spending taxpayers money". If the Tories unpicked the disingenuous Socialist/Statist newspeak of "government spending" and said what it really is, they might see it is not so scary.

Alas, it is likely the only party that will reduce the amount of taxpayers money it spends is the Libertarian Party.