Morning:
9°c
David Cameron has indulged his inner Kaiser Chief: who'd have thought "I predict a riot" would be the new Tory anthem? For all his shrewdness, Mr Cameron is prone to the odd outburst of stupidity, and this is a very foolish one.
Democratic politicians have no business predicting civil unrest, and certainly have no idea whether spending cuts by a Labour government will turn us into a revolting nation, as opposed to say, losing at football or becoming cross about something else entirely.
Rather like his overwrought prediction that a broke Britain would end up sinking into the arms of the IMF, these are eventualities to be treated with caution. Others can talk Britain down: it isn't his job.
Conservatives have made a rod for their own back by insisting that they are the honest party on spending cuts and that Mr Brown is being deceitful in failing to say where his axe will fall. It is one of those typically bold Cameron-Osborne manoeuvres, which demands more thinking about the consequences than they readily admit.
So the Shadow Chancellor is furious at the Government's refusal to share information about spending and potential cuttable areas, while havering about what he will tell us about his own plans and when.
The row over what needs to be cut to repair a massive budget deficit is already at the centre of the next election campaign. We are dealing with a very small mint with a gaping hole in the middle when it comes to the public finances.
In addition, the Conservatives are fast becoming exposed as the party that preaches honesty about cuts, while refusing to detail where they would fall. Worse still, they project an impression of disarray by sounding unsure among themselves.
So rather to my surprise, the Shadow Schools Secretary, Michael Gove, said yesterday that the Tories would protect "front-line spending" on education, while Mr Osborne, speaking to the BBC later in the day, emphatically did not back this claim.
He cited only health and (increasingly bizarrely) inter-national development as areas which are ring fenced.
Mr Gove was then further entangled on Newsnight in previous statements by a front bench colleague to the effect that some education spending is shielded from the cuts - and resorted to calling Jeremy Paxman "obtuse".
Frontally attacking Paxo is the last refuge of the politically defensive.
As Mr Cameron surely knows, the first thing to be revealed in any election campaign is ambiguity - and this is starting to look like a Tory mega- muddle.
But the Government is also in a fraught position as Mr Brown embarks on his summer relaunch after the disastrous June local elections - and those Cabinet walkouts which have left some uneasy New Labour ghosts wafting around.
One tendency that most damages Mr Brown's reputation is his habit of digging in on a statement which cannot possibly be true and then maddening people by repeating it ad nauseam.
His insistence that cuts would not be necessary and that "investment" (i.e. spending) would continue as the economy returned to growth has caused outbreaks of sheer disbelief, even in his own ranks.
Indeed, I understand that Peter Mandelson inter alia, has argued for a different approach: in which Labour would accept the necessity of reducing spending but argue that it would be a more skilful surgeon than the Conservatives, who (it would say) have an ideological predisposition to cut.
One former senior member of the Treasury team who worked closely with Mr Brown, tells me the only way his promises will be fulfilled, would be "with massive tax rises soon after the election".
Somehow, in the wake of increasing the top tax rate to 50 per cent from next year, that does not sound like something the Prime Minister would consider a popularity enhancer.
He could, however, resort to a National Insurance rise dedicated to say, health spending - an area in which Labour still tugs heart-strings.
That would put the Tories in an awkward position: but voters would doubtless view it as yet another tax rise in thin disguise.
But Mr Brown and his ally in these matters, Ed Balls, have not always profited as much as they hoped by drawing their beloved "dividing lines".
The one dividing line that matters at the moment is that voters no longer believe in Mr Brown's capacity to steward the economy through the cuts they believe will be painful.
To deny what most people believe to be a sore inevitability does not strike me as good politics, however proud the Brown-Balls duumvirate can be of sowing discord on the opposing team.
The wisdom of the masses is more reliable than that of the Government. Most of us know that cuts are coming, and are beginning to work out where we would prefer to see them fall.
The PM gambled on stabilising the economy: now, as a further dip threatens, the best he can argue is that things would have been even worse without his intervention.
Relaunches are always difficult businesses, not least when money constraints mean that voters are effectively being offered goodies from the back of the policy cupboard in some pretty thin new wrapping.
In fairness to Mr Brown, he is showing signs of backing off on the reprehensible policy of compulsory ID card trials - but that only leaves me wondering why he doesn't make a truly bold move and rid himself of the entire costly and dubious scheme.
Two themes already dominate the next election: spending and debt.
The lines are already so firmly drawn that most of us would probably rather get the clash over with. Alas, a long and bitter campaign of attrition is the more likely outcome
Meanwhile, voters, sickened by the expenses fiasco and distrustful of the political class, once again find themselves on the end of two bucketloads of half-truth and concealment flung from opposing directions.
So what about the voters? It is, after all, our money and our debt. We shouldn't let them get away peddling this unappetising New Fudge.
A lengthy campaign that obfuscates figures and definitions will be a poor end to Mr Brown's reign - and a poor start to Mr Cameron's brave, if broke, new Britain.
Anne McElvoy presents Dave's Friends in the North tonight on BBC Radio 4 at 8.45pm.
Reader views (4)
Damned if he doesn't and damned if he does. There WILL be riots if this Labour government is not honest about the savings that will have to be made by this country in the coming years. THE MONEY HAS RUN OUT. Its gone, it has been spent. To pretend as Brown and co do that they can splash the cash like it's 1999 and delay the spending review is not just crazy, but is actually treasonous. The savings will have to come. All Labour is doing is burning every crop, taking every bit of food and spoiling every well to ensure that an incoming Conservative government has to make huge savings to pay back the catatrophic levels of debt we are still running up. It's treasonous because while it might be good for the Labour party, it is most certainly not good for Britain.
- Richard Holloway, London
As it seems that British politics is only about fancy phrases, then one must admit that Mandy's 'more skilful surgery' beats the heck out of 'there'll be riots.' Cameron needs to ensure that when he has stopped floating like a butterfly, and is ready to sting like a bee, that he doesn't trip over the ropes.
- John Problem, Hackney UK
Commentators have to criticise and use the present. We forget Brown and Labour deal in 1984 Doublespeak.
Brown has made the UK fiscal defecit 14% next year and about 100% external debt. Several times worse than Argentina when it collapsed under 3% fiscal defecit and 55% external debt. Brown's 10 worst financial disasters are listed on the Times website. A sad tale of ignorance about basic finances, misdirection and mismanagment on an epic scale. Mostly self inflicted wounds to boost income to buy votes. He sold assets, stealthily took maximum income, set up loans for taxpayers to repay over 30 years costing double so as to keep them off the balance sheet, and changes to a safe banking structure failed in 5 years.
Brown now is hiding the facts and truth, and all know he has no morality since his mask was ripped off by McBride. The government is acting like a criminal concealing incriminating facts, while the papers have to get the truth out, like the Telegraph on expenses. It is government meltdown into criminal actions.
Anne has one main point right Brown and Labour will lie and cheat to make this election the dirtiest and most personal class war ever. That will cost them dear. If they automatically hate toffs, get UK schools better so kids can become competent to lead the country.
- Jimmy, glasgow uk
I was breathtakingly stupid of Cameron to talk about riots and he should retract this and apologise.
- Carl, London
