Ben Bradshaw blasts Radio 4's Today programme | Media | guardian.co.uk
The culture secretary, Ben Bradshaw, has attacked BBC Radio 4's Today programme, accusing it of running a "feeble and biased" interview with shadow chancellor George Osborne this morning.
Today presenter Evan Davis conducted this morning's interview with Osborne, which Osborne used to explain why he had used yesterday's speech at the Conservative party conference to outline unpopular measures, including raising the retirement age earlier than is currently being proposed.
"Whoever wins the election is going to have to take these choices ... Whoever tells you otherwise is, frankly, lying to you," he said.
Bradshaw is absolutely right on this. Davis is feeble: if he knows anything about economics at all he persistently fails to show it.
The reality is that the likes of Davis have allowed Osborne to promote the agenda that cuts are the only way out of the current recession. They are not. Far from it. As any Keynesian knows - the reality is that when we have less than full employment (and surely even Osborne would agree that is what we have) then government spending pays for itself as a result of the multiplier effect and as such the best way out of this recession is additional government spending.
So the liar is Osborne. And Davis failed miserably to hold him to account for the lie. Shame on him.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
No Richard, it is wise Governement spending, not willy nilly excess
spending on bureacracy.
Stephen
Do you honestly think I’d be promoting waste?
Real investment in real environmental projects
Real investment in state owned infrastructure that we need – and should not be PFI’d
Real investment in the future
And by all means strip the mad market out of the NHS at the same time – that’s pure waste
Richard
But Richard, in failing to come to terms with the fact that almost all new jobs in the last few years have gone to overseas workers, which obviously breaks the earn/spend cycle while ensuring parallel high unemployment payouts and misery for people here, this is feebleness on your part (not to excuse E Davis)
Keynes stimulus cannot work here, under these labour movement conditions and your Green New deal should have the guts to face up to it.
If state owned energy utilities is what the Green New deal recommends, and there cannot be any climate change policy without it, does it really address how to get from A to B or more like A to Z perhaps, inlcuding the labour issue.
The labour issue matters because there is no trainnig of workers going on at the moment, the skilled workforce whether in work or not is ageing, so we are looking at an absolute loss of skills to build and maintain energy faciltities. Id say there is (even) less chance of state-owned when there is no indigenous work force.
But it would help if you spoke up about movement of labour.
And if you are talking about state owned infrastucture, especially reversion of infrastructure that has been sold off – that’s such a shift that its hardly a one liner! Dont get me wrong – bring it on!
At the Convention of the Left last month, Rob Griffiths (leader of Communist Party of GB) suggested the following unifying policy, which could have popular appeal: public ownership of gas, electricity, rail and water.
I would add the collection of all land rent for public benefit. Renewal of infrastructure could then be self funding, as all such investment, if it is sensible, feeds directly into increased land values.
Unless I have missed something along the way, would it not make more sense to spend the money (£175bn?) generated by ‘quantitative easing’ directly into the economy instead of buying back debt, and reduce the need for more borrowing?