The budget debate on Channel 4 tonight was fascinating.
Vince Cable won on honesty and obvious integrity, especially when refusing to give commitments.
Alastair darling hit Osborne hard on NIC and he had no defence at all — especially as he couldn’t defend now spending savings he ridiculed last week
Cable and Darling both shoed quick wittedness and humour and Osborne none
Darling was most economically coherent — Vince was confused on fundamentals. Osborne so obviously sailed with the wind it was laughable
Overall Vince is most competent
But he can’t be Chancellor — as we all know. So Darling won.
Labour’s right to pick on Osborne, as both cable and darling did with great effect. He really is a Tory weak link.
Osborne’s classic line “I’m competent to be Chancellor because I’ve spent five years watching a man do the job”. watching paint dry does not a make a person a decorator.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!
I watched it.
Cable is sounding like someone who has the right nous to use good theoretical argument, personable appeal and increasing political gravitas to push the right buttons for me. However, as much as I believe his ‘big bad bankers’ stating-the-obvious-when-others-are-too-scared spiel, I can’t get rid of the Big Oil thing. I like his style, though. Nothing much to lose. He was very good as the caretaker-manager when Kennedy crossed the being legally-high-in-public acceptance line.
Darling couldn’t do anything but reinforce what he said at Budget. I think he followed that script without illuminating much. He’s ticked some positive boxes by re-iterating that he said some anti-party-spin comments because he felt convinced of his motives. Whatever happens, I think he’s presented a level-headed approach and shouldn’t be disgraced by his tenure at Treasury.
OK. So Osborne didn’t tank it. I’m roughly the same age as him, and if I use that as a gauge, I could not, and would not, be offering myself for that level of scrutiny and responsibility. So I can only be admiring at that level. Let’s be clear, though, there is nothing there. He can’t trumpet his predicated ideology, he can’t offer an alternative to the rubbish the UK is landed in, so where’s the angle? He’s supposed to be the right-hand of the Opposition. And he found it funny to laugh at Sarkozy for being smaller than him.
Invest in the people.
I think I am a bit less left-leaning than either Richard or Arnald but even so, I agree with thier assessment. Osbourne is a lightweight and I actually thought, watching it, that he almost made the Conservatives unelectable. Ken Clarke would be so much better.
Darling was OK but made a few silly attacks: I don’t think getting rid of child trust funds and tax credits for those earning over £40k will increase child poverty. Also, I think the problem for Labour is that they have been in power for 13 years and people prefer to hear them defend their record rather than attack others.
Vince Cable was clearly much the best, not least because he is the only one who appears to tell the truth. I think Darling wants to tell the truth but believes he needs to turn everything into an attack on the Tories. Osbourne simply seems out of his depth. Which is amazing because all he really needs to do is attack Labour’s records: no job creation in the private sector and the money now run out.
But Richard, I wouldn’t be so sure about Vince Cable not being chancellor. The LibDems could do very well in this election – Brown is hated in England and large numbers do not trust the Tories. It is quite possible that the Lib Dems end up with 70-100 seats as a result of tactical voting.
Even if they don’t, aa hung Parliament is still possible and it is obvious to me that Lib/Lab is a more likely coalition than Lib/Tory. Gordon Brown would have to go – his party hate him and he would have lost his mandate to govern. I’m not convinced about the Milibands and think Darling has shown himself to be essentially honest and competent. I could quite envisage a Lib/Lab coalition with Darling as PM and Cable as chancellor.
Who says Vince Cable couldn’t be Chancellor/ I imagine more and more people might be thinking that, if the Lib Dems’ top demand is ‘Vince for Chancellor’, a hung parliament might be a very good option.
@mad foetus
Actually, my desired outcome is a Lab / Lib coalition
I see real prospect for reform then
And I like Vince a lot – as a person I have met on a number of occasions and whose company I enjoy
So I was guilty of a little sloppiness – I should have said he can’t be Chancellor in a Lib Dem majority government – so the choice people will make is between Darling and Osborne in a sense, and Vince may just benefit when they decide they don’t like either option
But he’ll be a residuary beneficiary however it is looked at
Richard
As a Labour Party member – who will get a vote on leader – I am not against Brown. If he had run against Blair I would have voted for him. We would have won in 1997 without Blair, whom I did vote for because he was the best of the bunch – even though I found him too smarmy by half.
A dear friend who died 3 years ago knew the Millipede family well. A lovely, kind man, he disliked one of the brothers intensely. The other one we met together and I have had some acquaintance with him since. I could detect absolutely no substance there – despite a seemingly illustrious academic background. It pains me to hear either of them talked of as a future leader.
Having listened to most of the debate and hearing the announcement today about funding care for the elderly, I think it is so lily-livered of Labour to back off from the very good idea of funding from inheritance. They should have laughed off the Tory jibe of ‘a death tax’ and ask them straight if they believe that inheritance tax is against their principles entirely.
The Fabians, in their report several years back, came out in favour of hypothecation because it can help in making the case for fair taxation to the general public. I was sceptical then but not anymore. The hypothecation of IHT for care of the elderly would make a very good start.