Mr Osborne’s maths…and morals

October 7, 2009 9:40 am

OsborneBy Liam Byrne MP / @LiamByrneMP

Yesterday, George Osborne comprehensively failed the credibility test – and a basic test of fairness. His plans fail to meet Labour’s pledge to halve the deficit over four years. He claimed “we are all in this together” – but his first priority remains a tax cut for the richest families.

The Credibility Test
People expected George Osborne to set out by how much he would cut the deficit, just as the Government has done by committing to cut it in half over four years. We heard nothing of the sort.

The Tories told us that George Osborne’s speech would set out clearly how they would pay for their long list of unfunded tax and spending commitments – “by this time tomorrow you should know just about everything”, Eric Pickles said on Monday.

But the speech doesn’t even pay for itself, let alone make any progress on their irresponsible plans for tax and spend, or matching the Government’s plan to halve the deficit over four years.

First, people were expecting the Conservatives to drop the tax and spending pledges they have already made – just six of which were estimated in The Independent to cost £54bn. Yet all the uncosted pledges stayed.

Second, the Tories were expected to drop their pledges on inheritance tax and marriage tax allowance. Yet it stayed.

Third, Osborne’s new idea to reverse the dividend tax credit change would cost £3-5bn a year – far more than the concrete savings he outlined. Fourth, Osborne’s plan for a tax cut for small business, announced last night, that would undercut existing firms, remained unfunded – in fact it wasn’t even mentioned in yesterday’s speech.

Worse, their plans on raising the retirement age completely unravelled.

Last night George Osborne briefed that he would save £13bn a year by raising the retirement age for men and women to 66 by 2016. But the Shadow Chancellor’s new policy has already been downgraded, by David Cameron, to an independent review without even a chair to put a name to it. And the firm 2016 date for implementation has disappeared for women and been watered down for men.

Even before the u-turn it was clear the savings figure didn’t stack up. And even once they’ve got their costings right, the change still won’t raise a penny in the next Parliament when we are halving the deficit. To get anywhere near £13bn of savings would require much faster increases in the retirement age for everyone, including women. If that is the Tories’ plan they should come clean on it.

The Fairness Test
Mr Osborne’s fairness failure was even worse. His credibility failure left him simply attacking the middle class to pay for the Tory tax cut for the richest few. He stuck by his plans for an inheritance tax cut of £200,000 for the richest 3,000 families, for which the mainstream middle will have to pay. His plans would mean:

* 900,000 children would miss out on Child Trust Funds. Providers would stop offering accounts at all in some cases. For families earning over £16,040 with two children they would lose £1,000 in direct payments for their children.

* The removal of tax credits from those over £50,000 would hit 130,000 families and only raise £40m – the Tories’ promise to save £400m would mean affecting families on much lower incomes than £50,000.

So, bad maths. And worse morals.

No related posts.

Comments are closed

Latest

  • News Livingstone campaign statement on New Statesman interview

    Livingstone campaign statement on New Statesman interview

    A spokesperson for Ken Livingstone said: “Ken is clearly saying the advance of lesbian and gay people into politics is unequivocally a good thing. ‘Unlike many in the Conservative Party he has fought for equality for LGBT rights throughout his life including when it was highly controversial. He established Britain’s first civil partnership register, fought Clause 28 and backed LGBT Pride. ‘Ken will reinstate London’s LGBT Pride annual reception at City Hall, put the Greater London Authority back into the [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Cutting edge Ken

    Cutting edge Ken

    If someone had told me a year ago that Ken Livingstone would be the first politician in the world to announce a policy by text message frankly I wouldn’t have believed them. Neither would I have believed them if they’d told me Ken Livingstone would be the first British politician to have a bespoke social media site created which tracks member activity and uses pioneering methods which has resulted in record levels of activists out on the streets. The truth [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured The launch of Liberal Left is to be welcomed

    The launch of Liberal Left is to be welcomed

    The launch of Liberal Left is to be welcomed. Anything that challenges the Centre-right voting block of the Coalition is clearly a good thing.  Anything that helps develop centre-left relationships as an alterative now, tomorrow or in the future to a Conservative led government is to be welcomed.  With Labour currently struggling to maintain a healthy poll lead it would be stupid not to look for political partners outside of Labour’s ranks. But there is more than electoral necessity at [...]

    Read more →
  • News Birmingham by-election on the way?

    Birmingham by-election on the way?

    There’s an interesting post by Rafael Behr over at the New Statesman today about the possibility of Labour MPs standing down from Parliament to run either as mayoral candidates or police commissioners. According to Behr, much of the interest is around Birmingham: “Two names often cited as possible candidates for the Birmingham mayoralty are Liam Byrne, shadow work and pensions secretary and MP for the city’s Hodge Hill constituency, and Gisela Stuart, MP for Edgbaston. Of the two, fans of [...]

    Read more →
  • News

    New pro-Labour, anti-coalition Lib Dem group launched

    A new Lib Dem group – Liberal Left – have announced their launch today. The group is opposed to Lib Dem membership of the coalition, and appeared avowedly pro-Labour. Their launch statement includes the phrase: “A future coalition with Labour and others on the liberal left is more likely to secure Liberal Democrat goals than a further coalition with the Conservatives and we should actively work to make that possible.” More on this at The Guardian.  

    Read more →