Why Liberal Democrats' manifesto is far less ambitious than previous one
When Jo Swinson was Lib Dem leader back in 2019, her manifesto involved spending plans of roughly £63bn a year. The spending plans in today's manifesto are basically half that size - even less once you adjust for inflation.
First things first, if you're wondering whether the sums in the Liberal Democrat manifesto add up and - to adopt the phrase that leader Sir Ed Davey used rather a lot today - are "fully costed", the answer is: well, yes, sort of.
No, I wasn't wondering about that and I don't suppose many others were either. The only ambition Lib Dems have is to acquire a few more MPs by not being the Tory party and by not being disturbingly sensible. Ed Davey has a gift for that - a gift for not being disturbingly sensible
To a very good approximation, nobody in the entire universe gives a fig for Lib Dem spending plans because the chance of them needing a brand new set of spending plans is not high. Zero would be another good approximation. Zero often is a good approximation when it comes to anything Lib Dem, whatever the context.
7 comments:
I don't care what any party plans to do. Or whether their plans are "fully costed". What interests me is, "How much is this going to hurt?".
"Fully costed" is just a political-speak dodge to try and avoid challenge by others. It is also (but not primarily) about reassuring the public that 'taxes' will not need to be increased - but then a moment's thought occurs "If you can 'find' so many £billion down the back of the sofa why have you not already done so?".
I also wasn't wondering if they are fully costed. No parties plans are ever fully costed, even when they say they are. The only thing I ever wonder about, is if any of these useless parties will ever reduce spending and let us keep the money we earn
To which the answer is no
Well, that’s that then. :)
decnine - it will probably hurt financially and the missed opportunities will certainly hurt.
DJ - yes, "Fully costed" is a political-speak dodge. I'd be surprised if anyone has done any costing at all apart from back of a fag packet stuff. If they have found it down the back of a sofa, why isn't it being returned to taxpayers?
Bucko - I agree, they have no intention of reducing their appetite for our money. It has reached a level where we may as well regard the whole business as hopelessly corrupt.
James - until they come up with something else we weren't wondering about (:
The phrase 'fully costed' reminds me very strongly of another, 'peer reviewed'. I wonder why?
Tammly - it's uncanny isn't it? Almost as if both claims are wholly political.
Post a Comment