Oh that's interesting.. Nick Clegg is back sat next to Cameron (not directly next to him but near enough). Didn't he say he was boycotting the idea of that?
This was an easy win for Cameron today, successfully swatted Ed away and largely because the figures favour his arguments.
DO they? The figures Miliband quoted suit him, the figures cameron quoted suit him. Maybe they are all a load of rubbish and everyone is being taken for a ride and treated like idiots?
In a way he's summing up the Labour problem with the economy. It's all emotion and no substance. That's the difference between them and the Tories. At least Osborne has outlined what they're going to do and it may well not make good reading.. but at least it's there.
Ed Miliband still banging on about cuts and the nineteen thirties.
Clinging to a stat that fits the image of a pre NHS era wouldn't be so bad if it the same stat didn't also apply to about twelve years ago.
It also seems a weird tactic when a politician stands up and crows about how the government of the day have failed to sort a mess said politician's own government left behind.
One man's clever politics is another man's sign of desperation I suppose. If Ed is still banging on about the thirties come the new year rather than detailing what his party offer then desperate it will most certainly appear - for those who bother to look that is.
DO they? The figures Miliband quoted suit him, the figures cameron quoted suit him. Maybe they are all a load of rubbish and everyone is being taken for a ride and treated like idiots?
Spot on and that is why I cannot help but laugh at the partisans (from both sides) who claim victory every week.
In one sense Miliband was totally correct about cuts taking public sector spending back to the 1930's. The OBR said "total public spending is now projected to fall to 35.2 per cent of GDP in 2019-20, taking it below the previous post-war lows reached in 1957-58 and 1999-00 to what would probably be its lowest level in 80 years." On the other hand, in real terms, it will be significantly higher than in the 1930's.
Also, in the last few days Cameron and Osborne claimed to have halved the deficit (by using GDP). However, as Fullfact pointed out "the chosen headline measure of the deficit is its absolute value—the borrowed sum that must be paid back" and that shows it down by just over a third.
They both try and use what suits them but I find that the best approach is not to blindly swallow what they say and do my own research. Yet another 0-0 draw for me today.
Ed Miliband still banging on about cuts and the nineteen thirties.
An attempt by Labour to pretend that actual future spend by the Tories would exactly equal 1930s expenditure. Another blatent manipulation of the truth by Labour.
An attempt by Labour to pretend that actual future spend by the Tories would exactly equal 1930s expenditure. Another blatent manipulation of the truth by Labour.
They all do it not just Labour, but Labour deservedly get more stick because their leader likes to describe himself as some kind of new breed of politician who's sick of all that nonsense whilst being one of the most active participants in the "dark art".
Clinging to a stat that fits the image of a pre NHS era wouldn't be so bad if it the same stat didn't also apply to about twelve years ago.
It also seems a weird tactic when a politician stands up and crows about how the government of the day have failed to sort a mess said politician's own government left behind.
One man's clever politics is another man's sign of desperation I suppose. If Ed is still banging on about the thirties come the new year rather than detailing what his party offer then desperate it will most certainly appear - for those who bother to look that is.
Thanks for a little clarity. Miliband baffled me today.
Possibly working to the golden rule that "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance then baffle them with b*llshit".
Comments
No he isn't.
Viewing left to right Hague Clegg Greening Cameron's space Osborne.
Clegg and Greening are shoulder to shoulder.
Ah yes didn't spot her Greening at the time.
They looked more like Statler and Waldorf in that shot!
He has improved since 2010 when he behaved like an out of control baboon.
Plenty of empty spaces on all sides
DO they? The figures Miliband quoted suit him, the figures cameron quoted suit him. Maybe they are all a load of rubbish and everyone is being taken for a ride and treated like idiots?
He trained in law that's why.
Clinging to a stat that fits the image of a pre NHS era wouldn't be so bad if it the same stat didn't also apply to about twelve years ago.
It also seems a weird tactic when a politician stands up and crows about how the government of the day have failed to sort a mess said politician's own government left behind.
One man's clever politics is another man's sign of desperation I suppose. If Ed is still banging on about the thirties come the new year rather than detailing what his party offer then desperate it will most certainly appear - for those who bother to look that is.
Piles
Spot on and that is why I cannot help but laugh at the partisans (from both sides) who claim victory every week.
In one sense Miliband was totally correct about cuts taking public sector spending back to the 1930's. The OBR said "total public spending is now projected to fall to 35.2 per cent of GDP in 2019-20, taking it below the previous post-war lows reached in 1957-58 and 1999-00 to what would probably be its lowest level in 80 years." On the other hand, in real terms, it will be significantly higher than in the 1930's.
Also, in the last few days Cameron and Osborne claimed to have halved the deficit (by using GDP). However, as Fullfact pointed out "the chosen headline measure of the deficit is its absolute value—the borrowed sum that must be paid back" and that shows it down by just over a third.
They both try and use what suits them but I find that the best approach is not to blindly swallow what they say and do my own research. Yet another 0-0 draw for me today.
An attempt by Labour to pretend that actual future spend by the Tories would exactly equal 1930s expenditure. Another blatent manipulation of the truth by Labour.
They all do it not just Labour, but Labour deservedly get more stick because their leader likes to describe himself as some kind of new breed of politician who's sick of all that nonsense whilst being one of the most active participants in the "dark art".
Thanks for a little clarity. Miliband baffled me today.
Possibly working to the golden rule that "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance then baffle them with b*llshit".
Yes but in the case of Millibands it could not dazzle anyone even if you polished it