More on Cutting the Cost of Politics
A follow up from David Cameron yesterday to his speech earlier in the week about cutting the cost of ministers and MPs
"The seasons might be changing but this Groundhog Day Government certainly isn't. Labour came back from their summer holidays promising a fresh approach - more honesty and more realism about the state of the public finances.
But after all the spin the most striking thing about Alistair Darling's speech was what he didn't say. He still couldn't bring himself to utter the word 'cuts' and there were no new commitments to reduce spending.
What's more he didn't address the fundamental inconsistency in Labour's argument. He says he'll reduce the deficit once the recession is over, yet his own forecasts expect growth to resume at the end of this year.
So why on earth are they still planning to increase spending next year by £30 billion? Simple - there's a general election around the corner and for Labour, doing the right thing lost out long ago to political calculation.
On the same day I gave a speech that showed our approach is the exact opposite. I was honest about the scale of the challenge, and that cuts have to be made.
I said we had to start dealing with the debt as soon as possible, and that the extra £30 billion is simply too much. I also set out new commitments to reduce spending by cutting the cost of politics.
The whole pampered, profligate apparatus of modern politics has got to be trimmed back. The chauffeur-driven cars, the subsidised food, the public affairs consultants, Ministers' pay, even the number of MPs - all have to be cut.
People say this is a stunt. When the deficit is £175 billion, saving £120 million isn't going to make a massive difference. I know that. But this isn't just about the money - it's the message it sends out.
This country is in a debt crisis. We must all now come together, play our part, carry our burden and pay our fair share. And that starts at the very top - with politicians cutting the cost of politics."
"The seasons might be changing but this Groundhog Day Government certainly isn't. Labour came back from their summer holidays promising a fresh approach - more honesty and more realism about the state of the public finances.
But after all the spin the most striking thing about Alistair Darling's speech was what he didn't say. He still couldn't bring himself to utter the word 'cuts' and there were no new commitments to reduce spending.
What's more he didn't address the fundamental inconsistency in Labour's argument. He says he'll reduce the deficit once the recession is over, yet his own forecasts expect growth to resume at the end of this year.
So why on earth are they still planning to increase spending next year by £30 billion? Simple - there's a general election around the corner and for Labour, doing the right thing lost out long ago to political calculation.
On the same day I gave a speech that showed our approach is the exact opposite. I was honest about the scale of the challenge, and that cuts have to be made.
I said we had to start dealing with the debt as soon as possible, and that the extra £30 billion is simply too much. I also set out new commitments to reduce spending by cutting the cost of politics.
The whole pampered, profligate apparatus of modern politics has got to be trimmed back. The chauffeur-driven cars, the subsidised food, the public affairs consultants, Ministers' pay, even the number of MPs - all have to be cut.
People say this is a stunt. When the deficit is £175 billion, saving £120 million isn't going to make a massive difference. I know that. But this isn't just about the money - it's the message it sends out.
This country is in a debt crisis. We must all now come together, play our part, carry our burden and pay our fair share. And that starts at the very top - with politicians cutting the cost of politics."
Comments