Brown's "0 percent rise" - UPDATED
Fraser Nelson 12:44pm“We can do this the easy way or the hard way” Cameron said on Monday – and today, Brown finally agreed to do it the easy way. He seems to have dropped his Big Lie - that public spending will rise after the election. He’s doing it in stages, so today we had the rather wonderful claim that in 2013/14 it will rise “by 0%”. How does he produce this? We at CoffeeHouse aim to serve, and reveal the trick behind his latest Brownie here:
I gather there was a discussion about this in Cabinet yesterday where Brown was basically told to drop his lie because no one believes it and no minster wants to repeat it (I’m trying to get more info, and will update you as and when). Now, no-one should claim victory – Brown could always revive the lie later. And he’s still deeply uneasy: after PMQs his spokesman was asked to explain the concept of a "0 percent rise," and muttered something about spending envelopes. It appeared to me like he was genuinely unaware of the above statistical scam that Brown has deployed: to finally, reluctantly, at the point of Cabinet rebellion, agree to look at total spending in real terms; and then focus on the lowest cuts of those three years. While it shows up on the computer as 0 percent it is actually a fall – from £701m to £700m. So it should really be called a 0 percent fall, but no matter. Brown’s almost pathological failure to level with the public has created this wonderful “0 percent rise” line which I suspect we’ll see in the papers tomorrow.
We also saw a new position, repeated twice at PMQs today. Three weeks ago, he lied (yes, lied) that capital spending was rising in the year to the Olympics then falling. Last week, he admitted that it will fall. This week, he still hasn’t quite reconciled himself to the truth (this is such a struggle for the poor soul) and claimed it was falling after 2011. But he also said, in an earlier question, that it falls in 2010/11. The latter is right. This really is not rocket science – the below graph lays it out pretty clearly. Capital spending falls after this financial year:
So, when asked about total spending, Brown splits it: into so-called “current spending,” forecast to rise by an average 0.7% from April 2011 to April 2014, and then capital expenditure which - as he says - will fall. Even if he can’t quite squeeze the truth out of himself about when, exactly, it will fall.
Cameron was having fun today, and remarked mid-PMQs how weak Brown was. I will leave the assessment of their relative performances to Lloyd Evans, but I’d like to close on one final point. Cameron remarked how unemployment “unfortunately” will keep rising. Brown seized on this, claiming it was now “Tory policy” for unemployment to rise. Really? In which case, it is also Treasury policy for unemployment to rise. The below is an extract from Box C1 of Budget 2009, p221:
The Trasury is forecasting that claimant unemployment – a lower definition than normal ILO unemployment – is to rise by a third of a million. Is this Labour policy for this to happen? Of course not. How infantile of Brown to make such a ridiculous suggestion. The Budget is simply forecasting the sadly ineviatble result of the collapse of the failed Brown/Balls economic model. And no amount of verbal tricks can conceal that.
Previous
Richard
July 1st, 2009 12:58pm Report this commentGeez - you mean he rehearsed the line '0% rise' - that makes it even worse.
Dave S
July 1st, 2009 1:21pm Report this commentUK Plc 'earned' £477Bn in 2006/07, £553Bn in 2007/08, unpublished as yet, but believed to be £500Bn in 2008/09.
Still spending a lot more than we earn.
patrickinken
July 1st, 2009 1:24pm Report this commentIn case Ian Austin is not available to comment, could I also point out that spending accelerates in 2012/13.
Martin C
July 1st, 2009 1:29pm Report this commentSpending Rise of 0% including debt interest. Hmmm. Debt interest is set to rise sharply over the same period as the amount of debt rises. Debt interest is set to rocket if we lose our AAA credit rating, and debt interest is already costing as much as defence.
On these figures alone, there has to be massive cuts elsewhere, no other option.
jonathan
July 1st, 2009 1:32pm Report this commentMy personal favourite Brownie today, concerned unemployment; he criticised Cameron for basing his spending plans on the assumption that unemployment would continue to rise in the short - medium term. Presumably this critic implies that Brown doesn’t expect unemployment to rise…. Is he for real? Can Downing Street name one economist, think-tank or political commentator, who expects unemployment to fall over this period? Almost certainly – they cannot – because unemployment ALWAYS lags current economic trends, as any 1st year economics student will tell you.
Perhaps Cameron should ask Brown next week, if GVN spending plans are based on the assumption of rising or falling levels of unemployment; because if it’s the latter, we really are in fairy land.
Eddy
July 1st, 2009 1:32pm Report this commentYeah but even then it is a 0.14% cut.
Cameron should have asked him to produce the specific figures.
Not the usual biased poster
July 1st, 2009 1:48pm Report this commentNice one full length, I am so glad your Lick-a-thon for Dave is still running.
Any news on the special club?
michael m
July 1st, 2009 1:49pm Report this commentGordon Brown- the Zero Man
chris
July 1st, 2009 1:51pm Report this commentYou now need to aim your weaponry in order to get some detail of the departmental budgets which they intend to hide from us. We need chapter and verse.
Well done last night, Fraser, on Channel 4.
Jess The Dog
July 1st, 2009 1:57pm Report this comment"after PMQs his spokesman was asked to explain the concept of a "0 percent rise," and muttered something about spending envelopes"
Spending envelopes? More like sums done on the back of an envelope!
Jonathan Cook
July 1st, 2009 2:00pm Report this commentFraser,
You might want to amend the "pubic" typo.
The body language of the rest of the cabinet today backs up your theory that they forced Brown to back down on his lie.
Typical Brown though, he back out of one lie into several others.
Tim B
July 1st, 2009 2:01pm Report this commentWhat he needs to do now is tie this to the 'green' movement: "spending will rise by less than the expected average temperature rise in degrees celsius for the next 5 years".
It might be irrelevant, comparing apples to oranges, and utterly pointless, but it's never stopped him before :-)
Pete Hoskin
July 1st, 2009 2:02pm Report this commentJonathan Cook: thanks for the spot. I've fixed that now.
Slim Jim
July 1st, 2009 2:02pm Report this commentThe look on his face when he came out with that statement was classic. Can he really be that shameless?
RobC
July 1st, 2009 2:12pm Report this commentOnly a charlatan could interpret 0% as a positive or for that matter a negative in the current figures.
Richard
July 1st, 2009 2:16pm Report this commentI think we have come to expect as a matter of fact that Brown will lie on each and every occasion that he speaks whether in the House of Commons or outside it.
I sat and watched him on TV and his lies just go on and on to the point they become very boring.
He is clearly out of his depth as PM, so he should go, along with his government.
disgusted
July 1st, 2009 2:18pm Report this commentBravo Fraser! Presumably Brown's ludicrous lie about unemployment being Tory policy is part of the irrational mob-baiting policy.
“We don’t care if the commentators or the economists turn against us… This is all about shoring up the base in the northern heart-lands, which we lost in the European elections. We don’t want or need them to understand the nuance of the argument. We just want them to hate the Tories again.”
Robert
July 1st, 2009 2:30pm Report this commentBy Brown's tortured logic, since the government is assuming that x% of pensioners will die over the next year, it's Labour policy to let them die.
In our own daily lives, we routinely manage our money on the assumption that things we don't want to happen will, insuring against them when we can, so Brown is also going against the nation's personal experience,
Jonathan_T
July 1st, 2009 2:36pm Report this commentOn a related topic, Brown's reasoning for failing to confirm a spending review is laughable.
"Sorry chaps, bit difficult to plan at the moment because growth and unemployment are uncertain..."
Err yes, so what?
As any sensible Chief Exec will tell you, this is precisely when planning is most needed. Do a base case and scenarios based on various more / less catastrophic unemployment and growth figs.
I've not noticed any commentators pick up on this yet - seems pretty important?
Martyn Rowe
July 1st, 2009 2:45pm Report this commentAs a sidenote to the 'Labour is falling apart' line, I enjoyed listening to Labour's candidate for the Norwich by-election on Newsnight last night.
What a clodge. The whole party really is scraping the barrel.
Oh, and ps - to 'not the usual biased poster'. Do you read the blogs here regularly, or just when your parents let you?
Richard
July 1st, 2009 2:47pm Report this commentPriceless. Mr Zero Percent. Serial bunglers this lot. All of their projections are predicated on the questionable assumption that economic recovery will be well under way and thus tax revenues will have recovered. There is precious little evidence to support those assumptions.
JohnOfEnfield
July 1st, 2009 3:03pm Report this commentI am going to have to go back to my university notes (in the mid sixties mind you)& check where o% "lies" on the continuum of "real" numbers.
MisterE
July 1st, 2009 3:19pm Report this commentWhen I heard him say "0% rise", I thought it was just another of his gaffes... but to think he actually had that pre-prepared!?!
My god, what a cretin.
In the name of God, go!
July 1st, 2009 4:19pm Report this commentGovernment Announcement
It is hereby decreed use of the term "Pay freeze" is no longer permitted. This must now be replaced with the term "Zero percent rise".
This will lead to a confidence boosting measure for all staff enjoying such a rise and can be offset accordingly against the corporate negative profit allowance recently introduced.
End of release.
The Bellman
July 1st, 2009 4:54pm Report this commentStunning. I've just watched McSnotty claim on Sky News that he *meant* to say 'grow by 0.7%' but "the chamber was so noisy" that he couldn't "get the figures out".
Apart from the fact, easily verifiable by watching the footage, that the chamber was very quiet UNTIL he came out with this cockwaffle, the leering grimace on his face as he spouted this desperately thin excuse suggested that even *he* could tell it was piss-weak in its implausibility.
It makes you wonder why he bothers to lie so barefacedly. He's clearly losing his mind.
Hysteria
July 1st, 2009 5:33pm Report this comment@ Bellman - really? - would love to see that video posted - that really would be evidence in the main stream of a delusional leader
Paul
July 1st, 2009 6:33pm Report this commentThe Bellman: Thanks for that snippet
Just shows you that Brown doesn't have to plan a lie. They just fall from his gob when he opens it.
The discussion should move on. He is a pathological liar; is he, therefore, fit for our highest office?
The Bellman
July 1st, 2009 8:23pm Report this comment@Hysteria - sorry, I'm not technically competent, alas. Interestingly Fraser's post suggests at six pm suggests this is forming into the 'official' excuse...
If there's anyone who can find it and post a link - frankly morbid curiosity can be the only excuse for wanting to see it - it was on Sky News at about 4.45. I was so insensed I needed to vent on CH immediately...
Eric Blair
July 1st, 2009 8:37pm Report this commentI for one appreciate what New Labour have done for this country.
Everyone knows that a zero percent increase is double-plus good.
TGF UKIP
July 1st, 2009 10:37pm Report this commentUnfortunately my Sky+ recording didn't work so I don't know if Cameron hooked Balls in as well. If he didn't, pity, as he (and the rest of us) could have had even more fun, and got two for the price of one (and very possibly three by working in the inverted commas Chancellor) if he'd also gone on the Balls lie on Today yesterday about "reducing debt".
logdon
July 2nd, 2009 5:44am Report this comment"The Bellman
July 1st, 2009 4:54pm "
Repeated on BBC last night and swallowed hook, line and sinker with no follow up.
Course El-Beeb is presenting this as a mere Lab/Con spat with no emphasis on McSnot's probity as if the fact that we have a proven liar of a PM is of no account.
Back to top