The Tories are good at politics but hopeless at economics

It's the Conservatives' plans for immediate spending cuts that would stamp on the recovery.

6a00d83451b31c69e201347fa82225970c-500wi

Here is the Tories' latest poster, which rather brings to mind George Orwell's vision of the future as being "a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever". It is undoubtedly the party's most effective poster yet, and looks just about spoof-proof to me.

With a day to go until Gordon Brown calls the election, the political momentum is clearly with the Conservatives. But while the Tories are getting better at politics (that National Insurance pledge has helped them in the polls), they remain hopeless at economics.

Had they been in power at the time of the financial crisis, it is almost certain that Britain would still be in recession. Their opposition to fiscal stimulus and their support for early spending cuts would have prevented even the modest growth we've seen.

The 0.4 per cent growth in the final quarter of 2009 (up from a previous estimate of 0.1 per cent) was largely thanks to higher public spending and the car scrappage scheme.

The irony of the new poster is that, as our own David Blanchflower has persistently warned, it is the Tories' plans for immediate spending cuts that would choke the recovery and trigger a double-dip recession.

Meanwhile, David Cameron continues to claim that he can simultaneously cut taxes, cut the Budget deficit and protect front-line public services.

The limits of this approach were exposed today by the King's Fund, which accused George Osborne of indulging in a "sleight of hand" by promising to use the money the National Health Service would save from a cut in NI to fund £200m worth of new cancer drugs.

Professor John Appleby, chief economist at the fund, said: "It's a sleight of hand to say the least, because the money isn't there to be saved yet, so the money will have to come out of existing budgets."

There's plenty for Labour to get its teeth into here. But it needs to find a way to communicate the contradictions of the Tory approach to the electorate -- and soon.

Follow the New Statesman team on Facebook.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

What do Labour's lost voters make of the Labour leadership candidates?

What does Newsnight's focus group make of the Labour leadership candidates?

Tonight on Newsnight, an IpsosMori focus group of former Labour voters talks about the four Labour leadership candidates. What did they make of the four candidates?

On Andy Burnham:

“He’s the old guard, with Yvette Cooper”

“It’s the same message they were trying to portray right up to the election”​

“I thought that he acknowledged the fact that they didn’t say sorry during the time of the election, and how can you expect people to vote for you when you’re not actually acknowledging that you were part of the problem”​

“Strongish leader, and at least he’s acknowledging and saying let’s move on from here as opposed to wishy washy”

“I was surprised how long he’d been in politics if he was talking about Tony Blair years – he doesn’t look old enough”

On Jeremy Corbyn:

"“He’s the older guy with the grey hair who’s got all the policies straight out of the sixties and is a bit of a hippy as well is what he comes across as” 

“I agree with most of what he said, I must admit, but I don’t think as a country we can afford his principles”

“He was just going to be the opposite of Conservatives, but there might be policies on the Conservative side that, y’know, might be good policies”

“I’ve heard in the paper he’s the favourite to win the labour leadership. Well, if that was him, then I won’t be voting for Labour, put it that way”

“I think he’s a very good politician but he’s unelectable as a Prime Minister”

On Yvette Cooper

“She sounds quite positive doesn’t she – for families and their everyday issues”

“Bedroom tax, working tax credits, mainly mum things as well”

“We had Margaret Thatcher obviously years ago, and then I’ve always thought about it being a man, I wanted a man, thinking they were stronger…  she was very strong and decisive as well”

“She was very clear – more so than the other guy [Burnham]”

“I think she’s trying to play down her economics background to sort of distance herself from her husband… I think she’s dumbing herself down”

On Liz Kendall

“None of it came from the heart”

“She just sounds like someone’s told her to say something, it’s not coming from the heart, she needs passion”

“Rather than saying what she’s going to do, she’s attacking”

“She reminded me of a headteacher when she was standing there, and she was quite boring. She just didn’t seem to have any sort of personality, and you can’t imagine her being a leader of a party”

“With Liz Kendall and Andy Burnham there’s a lot of rhetoric but there doesn’t seem to be a lot of direction behind what they’re saying. There seems to be a lot of words but no action.”

And, finally, a piece of advice for all four candidates, should they win the leadership election:

“Get down on your hands and knees and start praying”

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.