The question over spending plans

In this morning's papers, understandably, David Cameron's statement yesterday is reported as ending his policy of matching Labour's spending plans.

It is understandable because that is what Mr Cameron said he was doing.

However it is important to understand that not matching Labour's spending plans is not the same as not matching the amount Labour intends to spend.

Eh?

Labour is about to review its spending plans. In other words what, it will, by next week, plan to spend in future is not the same as the amounts currently pencilled in.

David Cameron called on them to reduce those amounts. And it is very possible that they will do so. So reporting that the Tories will not match Labour's plans misses a crucial point. Labour probably won't match Labour spending plans.

Until we know what Labour intends to do, we will not know whether Labour and Tory plans will be the same.

Comments

[Guido Fawkes]

You sound like Donny Rumsfield. We know what we don't know etc.

[pregethwr]

You are right, but I think the dye is cast now. Even if Labour tighten the belt next Monday the Tories will undercut them still.

[John Scott]

But Mr Cameron's comments are correct for the week. Politicians seem to depend upon no one having a memory longer than that anyway (our esteemed Prime Minister being the best example of it) - why should Mr Cameron be any different? After all, the media rarely pull politicians up on it!

[Richard Young]

Here's an idea. Why don't David and his team take a rough estimate of what government income is going to be over the next five years - give or take - add in what they think it's prudent to borrow, then come up with some ways to use the money? Whether or not they're the same things as Labour plans to do, to the same amounts or for the same reasons is utterly irrelevant. Isn't the point of elections that we get to choose between different approaches?

I know it's been deeply unfashionable since the mid-1980s for opposition parties to say anything meaningful about what they'd do in office. But simply saying how you would or wouldn't go along with the government's plans takes this to a new level of pointlessness. Maybe a few specific policies - or actual regulations you'd get rid of, or real activities you think are simply waste - would actually win over some voters.