Politics

4 April 2009

Our poll shows that the public is way ahead of Cameron in seeing the need for cuts

Yet the very fact of the baby poster indicates a significant shift in Tory thinking: at last, the message of small-state fiscal conservatism is at the heart of the party’s presentation. Or, more aptly, ‘save the country’ conservatism — because the national debt will have risen by £5,700 in the time it takes you to finish this sentence. The Crewe & Nantwich by-election showed that a campaign against tax — in that contest, the abolition of the 10p tax rate — can have deep popular appeal. The key to winning the next election may lie in arguing the same about debt.

Time was when the Tories said all this regularly: Labour’s spending plans, they once told the electorate, would mean a ‘tax bombshell’. Brown’s brilliant innovation was to invert this and claim that Tory tax cuts could mean fewer nurses and police on the beat. The Tories were so stunned by this role reversal, their self-confidence destroyed by Black Wednesday and — in subsequent years — by three election defeats, that they dared not argue back. It was a complete intellectual victory for Mr Brown, who celebrated with a state spending bonanza unsupported by tax revenues and unmatched by any other developed nation.

Now the Tories are shaking themselves free of Mr Brown’s spell, dropping his language and searching for their own new political rhetoric. There is talk of ‘spending’ again, rather than ‘investment’. Significantly, Mr Osborne, I understand, will no longer talk in terms of spending ‘growth’ — a discreet U-turn, which perhaps few will notice. It means, in effect, that substantial spending cuts are no longer ruled out — but that this will not be advertised.

The next step is to go public. One message being considered by Osborne is to ‘cut spending and raise taxes to lower debt for our children’ — an unpleasant prospect, but at least an honest one. In the Spectator/PoliticsHome poll, 72 per cent say they are seriously worried by the national debt. There is a large, attentive audience waiting for Mr Cameron to say he will bring government spending back under control — that is to say, bring it down; that he will adopt a ‘save-the-nation’ cuts strategy; and in so doing, join the mainstream of public opinion.

PoliticsHome interviewed 1406 UK adults by email between 25–26 March. Results are weighted by party identification to reflect the UK at large.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3

More articles from: Fraser Nelson | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (7)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Rob Slack

April 3rd, 2009 3:21pm Report this comment

Why is it wrong to pass on debt to future generations? If the value of the assets we pass on (roads, schools, hospitals, human capital we paid for etc.) exceeds the value of the debt, we are leaving a surplus. Much of the carp about the debt burden we leave to our children is sentimental twaddle...political spin. We would better turn our minds to spending wisely; useful education, instead of Blair's tish about HE for the masses, would be a start. A ban on H&FE college courses for "nail technicians" (those people who charge £80.00 to stick guitar picks on women's fingers, fashion, snake oil healers and Chinese medicine (Middx. Uni.--5 years) would also be helpful.

johnc

April 4th, 2009 1:59am Report this comment

Yeah, screw the kids...

Michelle

April 4th, 2009 2:28am Report this comment

There are two types of insolvency: 1) if total liabilities are greater than assets, you're balance sheet insolvent; 2) if you can't pay off debts as they are due, you're cash flow insolvent. Even if the the nation has a net positive in assets (and would you trust the government's valuations?), she's still bankrupt if we can't pay the bills. That's the big worry.

BaiDaLong

April 4th, 2009 2:44am Report this comment

'This involved asking a carefully balanced group of 1,406 people various questions, then asking them to consider the arguments — then asking the question again.'

So who says we haven't learned anything from the EU. Isn't this how they do their referenda? Take Ireland, for example. Please.

Clive

April 10th, 2009 8:08am Report this comment

What the Conservatives fail to realise is that while cuts in Public SERVICES may be a sensitive issue, cutting WASTE in Public spending is not. There can be few outside the Political spectrum who would disagree with this and if carried out properly, the effective cuts in Public Sector spending would be hugely significant without ANY detriment to Public Services at all !

Rob Slack

April 10th, 2009 6:15pm Report this comment

jonhc said

"..screw the kids".

No John; if we screw ourselves badly we shall leave a bigger mess. If we leave debt we leave it to those who must pay and those to whom it will be paid...all people who will be alive in the next generation. It is only foreign debt that is a net burden. if we waste less we should leave less of that.