There's a serious message behind the Tory April Fools' campaign

Mike Thomas

All very good and very clever, more of this please. It reminds me of the Ministry of Silly Walks.

My April's Fools day was complete by Mandy having what only can be described as a complete s*itfit on radio and TV that his business chums have jilted Labour and their tax on jobs. Then to see his spin-meister "J'accuse" instantly rebutted by some of the signatories only amplified by contentment of this sorry spectacle.

Sir, you have been upended. No more fine dining courtesy of the private sector for him.

Simon

"implicitly makes the point that spending can be cut this year - because, of course, not all spending is good spending."

I think the point about not making cuts before we're clear of the recession is this: Spending helps stimulate the economy, because it puts money in the pockets of companies and individuals, who then spend it on other companies and individuals. Thus applies to any spending - whether by government or the private sector, and whether it's good, bad, wasteful or wise.

Of course waste should be eliminated, and the savings should either be returned to taxpayers or spent on something more fruitful. But anything that dampens the amount or velocity of spending in the coming year will put the recovery at risk.

Catherine

Genius.

AndyinBrum

To be fair, the Guardian's April Fool poster campaign is much better

Paul

@simon
if this is so why don't we make the savings and then provide more grant funds to small businesses that will really generate value in the economy - waste is waste - but i agree it should be redeployed wisely

Barry

Simon said: "I think the point about not making cuts before we're clear of the recession is this: Spending helps stimulate the economy"

Perhaps, but that is not always a good thing. It props up the deadwood. It papers over the cracks of some very real and major problems in our economy.(far too reliant on house prices for a start) The Government will never face up to these problems nor force them to be corrected if it simply borrows to make up a shortfall in revenue. It *does* waste vast amounts of our money.

A rote 'growth in spending = good' is what got us into this mess. Effectiveness and efficiency of spending has been thrown by the wayside. *I* can spend my money on things I need at a keener price than the Government ever can so if they leave more of my money in my pocket when they pick it my money drives efficiencies in the economy. Brown, by convincing himself that the ecomomy magically no longer worked in a cycle so he no longer had to be mindful of both sides to JM Keynes teachings, committed taxpayers to a dangerous period of spendthrifty-ness. When the economy was growing why was he borrowing £20-30billion a year on top of revenue?(Answer: He was doing what everyone else was doing - borrowing money and spending it to look like you're doing well.)

The Government has been spending more and more and getting less and less for it. It has redistributed wealth alright - into the pockets of a small number of Government friendly corporations and an ever growing class of grossly overpaid and underworked management types who are never accountable for their decisions and get massive payouts to leave one office just to sidle into another.

Government spending that goes into pockets of foreign businessmen (as say, the rent on HMRC offices does) does not stimulate our economy. Nor the money being thrown at foreign contractors, grant money being thrown at foreign companies, etc etc.

Welfare spending props up the retail industry and buy to let landlord sector. It has grown to ludicrous proportions. When the Government seeks to nanny people to a healthier life that does not square with their ever greater generosity to fund the painful and premature deaths of the welfare-by-choice class. Vouchers for benefits would slash the cost to the taxpayer and save lives. Child benefit should not be able to be spent on fags and booze.

Taxpayers have not voted for this. Taxpayers have no means to veto it either.

Man in a Shed

This type of approach is the right way to go for the PEBs later on.

Paul B

So Simon, if spending is good and helps the recovery, whats wrong with giving tax cuts: Rather than from people and then spending it. Better the Wimbledon way rather than the Arsenal`s in this instance.

Chris lancashire

Whilst I am absolutely convinced that there are massive "efficiency" savings to be had I think the Conservatives may find it difficult to obtain them quickly.
They are faced with an entrenched public sector which depends for its living on spending and generating work for each other.
An immediate hiring ban is essential but after that it will be a real struggle to wrest control from the apparatchiks who have spent 13 years building empires.

@Paul above: I run a SME and I don't want any government grants, I would like lower NI and lower CT and then please leave me alone to run my business.

Martin Keegan

Of course, to the extent that state spending is supported as a means of redistribution of wealth, there are those who would view all spending as good spending by definition. A survey (years ago, which I don't pretend to be able to locate) found that 10% of people would like tax to rise even if this produced no benefit.

Simon Stephenson

Simon : 1.46pm

"But anything that dampens the amount or velocity of spending in the coming year will put the recovery at risk."

Like, for example, paying out greater amounts of interest to foreigners to whom we are in debt? Amounts of interest that are guaranteed to rise the more the bond market doubts the UK's seriousness in tackling the problem of its indebtedness. Doubts that are bound to grow the more people with your line of thinking hold sway in determining national policy.

Let there be no question that the international bond market does not subscribe to your view that we must keep the spending taps on until the "recovery" is secure. Hard finance knows politicians, and it knows that irresponsibility and short-termism is at the heart of their policy-making, and bad faith at the heart of their dealings with people who don't form part of their voter base. Whichever party wins the election, there is no conceivable way that it is going to be allowed to p1ss other countries' money against the wall in the same way that Labour has p1ssed away our own money over the last 13 years.

TGF UKIP

It's only taken four years and even now the message is aimed at London hacks and not at the voters.

Marcher Baron

Martin, I bet those 10% who wanted tax to increase even if there was no benefit were not, themselves, tax-payers! I shop around to get the best value for money whatever I'm buying because I can, in the real world, only spend it once. I want the same to apply to my taxes. That it doesn't makes my blood boil.