Osborne's speech
James Forsyth 1:38pm
This was new, serious George. In a soberly-delivered speech, Osborne went a long way to reassuring voters that he is ready to be Chancellor. He stressed financial and fiscal responsibility and deftly threaded the political needle on criticising the excesses of the City without committing to more regulation. Osborne was so keen to demonstrate his seriousness that he kept his trademark smirk under wraps. He even bit his lip during one bout of applause in a seeming attempt to stop it from breaking through.
The headline from the speech is a freeze on council tax for two years. This will be achieved by returning government advertising and consultancy budgets to 1997 levels. To qualify for this funding, councils will have to keep their proposed council tax increases to 2.5 percent or less. Considering how unpopular council tax is one would expect the Tories to get significant political mileage out of this announcement,.
On tax, Osborne emphasised that it is his and his party’s ‘aspiration and ambition’ to cut taxes. But he refused to commit to tax cuts. Indeed, the language he used makes it almost impossible for the Tories now to commit to any. I can understand Osborne’s reasoning—the country is in too much debt—but he is leaving the Conservatives vulnerable to being outflanked by a new Labour leader.
This would not have been an Osborne speech if it had not been laced with barbs at Gordon Brown. He turned Brown’s experience argument round with the line that the country has had ‘quite enough of the Gordon Brown experience.’ He joked that Brown was spending like there was no tomorrow because ‘for him, maybe there is no tomorrow’.
It would also not be an Osborne speech if there wasn’t some borrowing from America. Alongside all the Obama-isms about change, Osborne’s peroration owed much to Bush’s 2004 Republican convention speech.
Last year, Osborne set things up perfectly for Cameron with his inheritance tax announcement. He has done the same again this year.
P.S. I hear that there will be a dynamic element to the model used by this new Office of Budget Responsibility.



Previous






geoff
September 29th, 2008 2:51pm Report this commentLOL. 700m out of consultancy budgets in year 2, without cutting consultancy in NHS, schools, police or international development.
The guy is a novice in cloud cookoo land.
Aidan
September 29th, 2008 3:35pm Report this commentHow does this reconcile with the aspiration to return power to the lowest possible level?
Keith
September 29th, 2008 3:50pm Report this commentI would query why we need consultancies at all. Why not just ask the people who do the job? Or would that be too easy for Gordo and his blank cheque book?
James
September 29th, 2008 3:56pm Report this commentI think that all Labour need to do to win the next election is to put Osborne's smug, smackable face on all their election posters. He is the new face of the old school Tory with every expression being one of arrogance and disdain for anyone perceived lower class than him.
Mark
September 29th, 2008 4:03pm Report this commentGeoff, you don't seem to have understood what Osborne said. The BBC summarise it as follows:
"The freeze would be paid for by cutting consultancy budgets by £270m in the first year and £770m in the second. Budgets for frontline services such as NHS, schools and police - and the Department for International Development - would not be cut.
The Central Office of Information budget would be cut by £230m in each of the two years."
Sounds sensible to me. Why pay outside consultants millions to do what the civil service is paid to do? And a cut in government advertising makes excellent sense.
Oscar
September 29th, 2008 4:10pm Report this commentIt was an excellent speech. Sober, grounded and realistic. The jibes at Brown really hit the mark, but there were no cheap jokes. In fact the jibes were so good because they were so true. The approach to the City was also excellent - I particularly liked the comparison with the rights and responsibilities of low income families to be equally applied to the rich. Clever point undercutting Labour's double standards. Far from looking like a novice Geoff I thought Osborne looked like a future leader.
David
September 29th, 2008 4:10pm Report this commentHi Geoff - Derek let you out of your cage yet?
Oor Willie
September 29th, 2008 4:11pm Report this commentAnother SNP policy being adopted by the Tories (in England).
They'll be cutting Business Rates next, and abolishing prescription charges.
CS
September 29th, 2008 4:11pm Report this commentOooh, "novice". I wonder where you picked up that word.
Paul B
September 29th, 2008 4:21pm Report this commentI found the speech mildly disappointing- as it didn`t go nearly far enough to address where savings can be made. However political realities dictate that GO cannot "scare the natives" he and the party have to be elected into office first to achieve any of their (and mine) ambitions, therefore the softly softly catchee monkey approach is understandable. However I do feel opinion in the country is ready for a more robust approach attitude to state spending/ taxation.
The freeze on council tax should prove politically popular-however I would prefer devolved power with councils raising a far large proportion of their money and facing the electorate on that basis alone-without any government cap, that would be the way ahead imo- especially if Verities idea of disenfranchising the public sector was brought in- which to me as attractions, although it would be dynamite and politically a non starter at the present time..
James
September 29th, 2008 4:24pm Report this commentAs Melanie Phillips points out not far from here the intention is to strengthen the Bank of England’s role in keeping the country out of debt by getting the Bank to oversee a new Debt Responsibility Mechanism, which will allow it to issue a public warning when private sector debt is running too high. Which institution presided over the catastrophic escalation of debt? Why, the Bank of England. Who is going to oversee the new system of warnings when private sector debt runs too high? Why, the Bank of England!
TrevorsDen
September 29th, 2008 4:37pm Report this commentIts consultants and advertising - the Central office of Information budget alone would be cut by £230 million.
just how much do you think the govt spends on consultants? Why, according to the Guardian way back in Dec 2006 the govt was spending £3billion a year. Are you saying that SOME savings cannot be made in that?
Oh dear geoff I guess you are laughing out loud on then other side of your face now.
I fail to see what Aiden is on about ... finding money to help Councils who want it is not taking away anyones power.
johnhall
September 29th, 2008 5:20pm Report this commentwell speaking as a consultant (not in the public sector though) i can tell you its often better value to get a consultancy in.
For example, getting the right shift system for a police force is quite a specialist task - much better to let specialists work it out and then move on rather than keep a standing team on the books.
But really we should be about leaving these decisions to local managers - not making them in whitehall.
But the real issue, is this is a very bold claim. I would say he has absolutely zero chance of saving 700m in year two without deep cuts to consulting budgets in health and policing.
mckenzie
September 29th, 2008 5:22pm Report this commentSTOP! GO!
Can't argue with that eh?
Prefer hurry up and fuck off myself, but I can appreciate the need for diplomacy here.
geoff
September 29th, 2008 5:23pm Report this commentMark - im just pointing out that there is absolutely no chance he can make a cut of this size. These consulting budgets will be for things like getting your accounts done.
If he was prepared to get deep into health budgets then yes maybe, but the idea there is an easy 700m sitting there is bogus. Sounds sensible, probably good politics, but no chance you can actually do it
Travis Bickle
September 29th, 2008 5:36pm Report this commentOh dear James, it's hardly as if the Labour benches are exactly devoid of smug, smackable faces........ Nice to have a debate based on grown up politics though, thanks so much for your contribution.
louisa
September 29th, 2008 5:45pm Report this commentFirst it was non-doms, now its consultants. Is osbourne really on the side of british business?
geoff
September 29th, 2008 5:47pm Report this commentA bit aggresive there from TrevorsDen. But look, being angry doesnt make it true. It will be nigh-on impossible to take 700m out of budgets without touching health, schools or police, in just 2 years time.
Guarantee you cant find a single accountant who thinks that is possible.
Nick Kaplan
September 29th, 2008 5:51pm Report this commentJames; the BoE did not oversee this insane growth of debt, because Brown (against the advice of several prominent Tories, notably Redwood) stripped the BoE of its supervisory role and instead gave it the sole duty of stabilising inflation. It is Brown’s tripartite regulatory system and his pushing of low interest rates that have got us into this mess, a more independent BoE with wider responsibilities could have prevented it.
David
September 29th, 2008 6:00pm Report this comment"but the idea there is an easy 700m sitting there is bogus."
In June 2007 a committee of MPs reported £500m of wasted money that was spent on consultants. Claiming that there's another £200m of waste floating around is a more than reasonable one to make.
Mark
September 29th, 2008 6:02pm Report this commentGeoff, I think you're wrong. Consultants are not auditors. They are brought it - as johnhall illustrates - to advise on things like shift patterns, or the ID card scheme. Let the vast army of civil service (inc. police) managers do that sort of thing and do something to justify their pay and pensions.
It's a winner.
C Powell
September 29th, 2008 6:13pm Report this commentPaulB: before you start getting carried away with Verity's disenfranchisement of the public sector idea, remember this: No taxation without representation. Or are you going to tell soldiers (they're part of the public sector too, remember) that they can die for the country but won't be allowed to vote for their country's government?
Paul B
September 29th, 2008 9:45pm Report this commentC Powell, I hear you, and although it does have some dark side nihlistic (is that the word) appeal, Im certainly not getting carried with it, so please don`t assume I am.
Back to top