Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Ed Balls Told To Take Clearer Line On Budget Deficit - Colleagues Confused....

Recommended Posts

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/28/ed-balls-budget-deficit-labour-party

Shadow cabinet members are privately expressing concern that Ed Balls needs to adopt a more clearly defined position on the budget deficit after recent statements that have left many of them confused.

The debate has been given greater force by a shadow cabinet meeting a fortnight ago in which the shadow chancellor bluntly warned colleagues that even under a Labour government there would have to be serious cuts, leading to “bleeding stumps” in the subsequent parliament.Balls also added that it would be impossible for any government to achieve the scale of cuts currently promised by George Osborne if the Tories won the election.

With the chancellor’s autumn statement due on 3 December, Labour and the Conservatives are both expected to focus on the economy over the next few weeks. However, there is still uncertainty about the speed and nature of the fiscal tightening Labour will accept. One shadow cabinet member said: “We need to decide whether we are the bleeding stumps party or the bleeding hearts party.”

There is frustration in some quarters that Labour are unable to make any promises for increased capital investment even though Balls has allowed himself room for manoeuvre in this area. One frontbench figure said: “We have gone from a position in the first half of the parliament of criticising the government for going too far too fast to one in which we say, ‘We’ll cut as fast as we can.’ If we are going to cut, we should say what. If we’re not going to cut as fast, we should say so, and reap some of the political benefit from that. At the moment we’re doing neither.”

Balls and the shadow chief secretary Chris Leslie will shortly to publish some of the outcomes of its zero based spending reviews, including some on home affairs, the ministry of justice, local government and asset management. These will give some specific ideas on how the party will try to cut the deficit in the next parliament.

Labour’s fiscal stance, set out nearly a year ago, is that it will deliver a surplus or balance on the current budget “as soon as possible” in the next parliament, but this leaves a range of options. Labour has not been precise about when it would seek to deliver a surplus, or how large.

Balls creating confusion, who'd have thought that. He doesn't have an argument just contradictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hardly a Labour supporter to put it mildly but I think they have strategists that outstrip the Tories at a canter, although that is not saying much. Tories have been flailing, leave them to it and certainly do not hand them ammunition in the form of your own policy proposals which allow them to attack you.

Having said that, the Tories can bungle attacking even the biggest open goals. Labour's proposed reforms for the private rental sector should have been torn apart on the basis that they purport to increase security of tenure but in fact significantly reduce security due to the insertion of many new scenarios where an S21 can be served during the 'three year tenancy'. But, Tories just ignored all that and bleated about 'rent controls' and Venezuela, making themselves look like even bigger cretins than previously (a feat in itself).

A plague on both their houses.

Edit just for Bruce: A plague on both their houses.

Edited by Joan of The Tower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hardly a Labour supporter to put it mildly but I think they have strategists that outstrip the Tories at a canter, although that is not saying much. Tories have been flailing, leave them to it and certainly do not hand them ammunition in the form of your own policy proposals which allow them to attack you.

Having said that, the Tories can bungle attacking even the biggest open goals. Labour's proposed reforms for the private rental sector should have been torn apart on the basis that they purport to increase security of tenure but in fact significantly reduce security due to the insertion of many new scenarios where an S21 can be served during the 'three year tenancy'. But, Tories just ignored all that and bleated about 'rent controls' and Venezuela, making themselves look like even bigger cretins than previously (a feat in itself).

A plague on both their houses.

You can say that again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, is to give a binding commitment that a Labour government will be running a budget surplus by the end of the next parliament, putting himself under severe pressure to deliver big public spending cuts if the party wins the next election.

The significant move means that Labour will now face the dilemma of either raising taxes after the election or adopting a similar daunting level of cuts in day-to-day departmental spending already proposed by the chancellor, George Osborne.

Isn't that very similar to the "binding commitment" that the Conservatives made before the last general election (binding commitment, promise, pledge, vow or whatever the current fad word/expression is at any given moment in time). Then they went on to almost double the debt (so far).

It sounds like the new revolution that's going to be offered before every election these days - and then going to be reneged on. The austerity hoax.

It's no way to run a country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Labour had already committed to match the budget targets of the tories in the next Parliament?

I don't think Labour have outwitted the Tories. Our fantastic leaders are once again playing the game of leaving the worst possible hand to their successors. In this case it involves an unbelievable amount of borrowing and cuts for the next Parliament, not this one.

EDIT: No. But there is this from the Grauniad.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/24/ed-balls-labour-will-run-budget-surplus

:lol:

I can hear pips squeeking.

Ha, good find. What a difference 9 months makes.

I still think the Eds have played their hands as well as could be expected. I don't think they have strategic masterminds onboard, but when the opposition is Shapps etc you don't need much of an edge. Labour also have not had to deal with UKIP in the same way as the Tories. It seems incredible to me that the shadow cabinet contains significant figures from Brown's days, and yet somehow they are on course to return to Govt. Cameron may well go down as a Tory leader who failed to beat Brownian opposition not once but twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have followed Ed Balls plan B to the letter, we are still running a 7% structural deficit, twice that of all our European neighbours. Any wonder we are the fastest growing economy in the G7...bought on debt. I can increase my economic activity by spending the future, it's not a sign of success.

What's the point of the Tories when we got a Balls up of a fiscal policy anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour need to ditch Milliband (& most of the rest) & elect Alan Johnson. They'd win the election hands down.

Not very good at picking leaders are they..Johann Lamont comes to mind too, fortunately the SNP hobbled themselves with Salmond as opposed to Sturgeon. Anybody that presents well could walk the election because Cameron is not popular either.

Couldn't do worse than Jim Murphy who will presumably be taking over from Lamont and thereby not be considered if Miliband fails to score into an open net in May. Such a chump he probably will miss.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be interesting how they decide to describe the binding commitment.

"Prudence" has become devalued and is now associated with profligate policies and economic devastation - and it's the only word with female connotations they could use to associate with female voters.

"Austerity" has been attached to negative connotations that they've used to criticise the current government (whilst the current government has actually been even more profligate than the last one).

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Binding: Will get you in a bind.

Commitment: Darling I love you until divorce do us part.

Binding Commitment: will get our successor in a bind.

Edited by porca misèria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they'd ditched Balls when they had the chance, Labour would have a much better chance of winning the next election. Can't understand why they didn't..

From what I have read in the past he has a reputation for having a personality that is something of a 'bruiser' and bully boy (a university educated version of Prescott)? Perhaps the senior ranks of the party is too full of wimps for anyone to take him on in private and tell him where to go? and this is in large part how someone of his mediocre calibre has managed to climb as far as he has?.......

Edited by anonguest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they'd ditched Balls when they had the chance, Labour would have a much better chance of winning the next election. Can't understand why they didn't..

Don't think he is effecting the polls much, a man hiding in the shadows now....nailed his mast to GDP and unemployment just before UK plc created more new jobs than the rest of Europe put together and hit top spot in the GDP stakes.

Should have gone with the deficit where Osborne's record is cataclysmically bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave

Because they don't actually want to win?

Actually, I believe the Labour party is just genuinely incompetent and run by political activists without any real world experience whatsoever.

Miliband is so dreadfully useless, you might reasonably suspect the current Labour Party is a left over from some satirical comedy program that a television company never got around to finishing, The Thick of It on steriods.

Balls has a "Thousand Year Stare" that makes children run behind the sofa. The man is quite simply a loon

I'm kind of surprised this has happened because the Fabians are so determined to destroy our nation and our way of life but their little club is full of complete and utter morons and people so utterly ghastly, no citizen with the slightest remaining vestige of common sense would consider voting for them.

Running the Country........into the ground

article-0-14179896000005DC-726_634x590.j

Edited by UK Debt Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lmfao

johnson is utter scum and a party man through and through, him and his kind are the problem not the solution.

wtf??

I was talking about the electability or otherwise of Labour. Personally the last thing I want is another Labour government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.