So what did the Lib Dems actually stop the Tories doing?

Today's budget rather gives the lie to the Lib Dem 'Scooby Doo' message of 'look what the Tories would have done if it wasn't for the meddling Lib Dems'.

The budget contained  two major public policy changes. Firstly switching the focus from the government subsidising low pay to the government forcing employers to pay a living wage.  And secondly lengthening the period of fiscal consolidation to smooth the public spending cuts.  These two changes would almost certainly (rightly) have been supported by the Lib Dems if they had remained in government (and the latter was basically the party's economic position two months ago).

The fact that both leadership candidates slammed the budget on the basis that the Tories were returning to right wing form without the Lib Dems was as predictable as it is wrong.  And it is extremely worrying for the future of the party that both contenders simply basically rehashed the disasterous Coetzee/Clegg messaging - the messaging that was comprehensively rebuffed by the electorate a few weeks ago.

The Scooby Doo message was ineffective as it relied on people understanding a bunch of imponderables - it's impossible to judge the effects of things that didn't happen.  And it was part of a wider failure of the Clegg leadership of failing to define a distinctive Lib Dem agenda for government meaning people could not tell what part of the coalition policy was down to which party.

But now that Osborne and the Conservatives have comandeered a fairly major part of both the Lib Dem and Labour economic policy and are likely to dominate the economic centrist space for the foreseeable future some rethinking is needed - and fast.

I don't expect Labour to come up with any credible rethink, but the Lib Dems must.  If whoever wins the leadership can't find a new and better vision for the economy that understands the values being promoted by Osborne's budget today, then there is little hope for the party. 

Exclusive: leaked footage of George Osborne's budget speech rehearsal

Chancellor George Osborne made much of choices in his budget speech this afternoon.  In one short passge he used the phrase 'we choose' nine times.

But winging it's way to LOWA towers was this leaked footage of his private rehearsals.  As you can see some of his language was quite fruity then...

An interesting take on the budget from Labour

Labour Uncut says the real winner of the budget is Nick Clegg...

The problem with Osborne...

...is that he is just too concerned with political point scoring as this response to a perfectly reasonable question from David Miliband on the Autumn statement shows. (The full debate and exchanges can be downloaded from the Hansard website). 

David Miliband (South Shields) (Lab):

This time last year, the Chancellor told me not to worry about youth unemployment on the grounds that his Youth Contract would take care of it. Now we know that 450,000 young people have been unemployed for more than six months and that 179,000 have gone on to the Work programme but only 5,920 have got a job as a result. That is 3% of those going on the Work programme and less than 2% of the long-term youth unemployed. Will he now agree, without point scoring, to look at the level of the wage subsidy to incentivise take-up, at the structure of the Work programme, so that voluntary organisations are not squeezed out, and at the role of a part-time job guarantee to give hope to these young people?

Mr Osborne:

The right hon. Gentleman often has interesting and intelligent things to say about welfare to work programmes, and I am happy to consider the points he makes. I read some of his work earlier this year—it was quite a good job application for being shadow Chancellor.

Osborne's credibility as Chancellor is reduced by this undergraduate debating style and his use of political beartraps in his proposals.  He should take a leaf out of Vince Cable's book and play it straight and grown up.

Time to cut the EU budget

The news that Tory rebels and opportunistic Labour MPs have defeated the coalition by calling for a cut in the EU budget means it is time for Lib Dems to rethink their atitiude to the EU.

With austerity across Europe it seems bizarre the political elite that is calling for belt tightening in Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal among others is incapable of practising what it preaches.

The line used by opponents of a budget cut (including Lib Dems) is that it will be impossible to agree budget cuts, so the best that can be hoped for is a freeze or small increase - so there is no point in trying.  And by not backing Cameron they are making it more difficult for him to negotiate.

This is pragmatism taken to a ludicrous degree which tells the people in the UK and across Europe that the man in Brussels is not one of us.  Because the EU won't refom itself or its policies such as the ludicrously overblown CAP it makes it more likely the only recourse is for people to pursuade their government that withdrawal is the only option.

So instead of ignoring this vote - the coalition should use it to strengthen their diplomacy - particularly among those governments facing tough EU backed austerity measures.  Showing the poorest in Europe that even the most priviledged Brussels bureaucrat is 'all in this together' may be the only way of keeping the EU together and curbing the rise of right wing isolatist parties like UKIP.

Clegg's Cornish pasty conference speech

There's an old saying about budgets that prove popular on the day, become unpopular in time.  And that was certainly true of this year's offering - shredding the credibilty of the Chancellor with every Cornish pasty sold in bakeries.  Sadly, the various economic and presentational gaffes also meant that its one big liberal success - the increasing of the personal allowance - was buried in an avalanche of negative headlines.

It looks like the same unravelling could be happening with Wednesday's Clegg speech.  Lord Bonker's estimable confidant - Jonathan Calder - being the first to break cover with some measured (and valid) criticisms of Clegg's position.

My problem with the speech was that the dead hand of the world's worst political strategist - Richard Reeves -  was clearly behind it.  Clegg's view is still there are votes to be gained by being 'a party of government' - despite the idea being tested to destruction by the last two and half years of coalition.

Clegg's assertion that, "...The past is gone and it isn’t coming back. If voters want a party of opposition – a “stop the world I want to get off” party – they’ve got plenty of options, but we are not one of them..." conveniently ignores the long term political dissillusionment with party politics - and particularly governments.

In 1951 the two 'parties of government' got 95% of all the votes cast in the UK - in 2010 it was just 65%.  Clegg now wants the party to ignore this growing third of the electorate, in favour of focussing on a shrinking two thirds of the electorate - many of whom have long held partisan loyalties.

It's a crazy strategy.  Many of the people who voted Lib Dem in 2010 (and before) didn't want to 'stop the world' - they wanted a strong Liberal voice to speak up for them in government.  They wanted to take on the vested interests - in politics, business, the media and organised labour - who are responsible for the economic and political crisis in this country.

The reason why these voters have turned against the Lib Dems is that they appear to have joined the vested interests instead of attacking them from a position of power.  Unless Clegg sees the error of his ways they will find other - no doubt more illiberal voices - to take up the mantle of fighting for the little guy against the powerful.

Edit 29.9.12 - the ever excellent Andrew Page has also waded into the debate in similar terms.

The one budget U-turn we won't see...

'... today George Osbourne admitted cutting the 50p top rate of tax was a mistake and agreed to continue with it until economic conditions were suitable for tax cuts.'

If he did however, he might start to restore some of his recently (deservedly) shredded reputation for economic competence.  It might also help the Conservatives deal with the issue that they are perceived as a bunch of out of touch rich boys.

Geordie comedienne leads Labour's budget response...

Thursday March 15th, Sarah Millican: "For the Queen Downton Abbey is like watching Big Brother."

Wednesday March 21st, Ed Miliband: "the cabinet sees Downton Abbey not as a costume drama but a 'fly-on-the-wall documentary'."

Looks like the 50p tax rate is a goner...

...so says Lib Dem Voice's ever well informed Mark Pack.

What is not clear is what the Lib Dems will get in return. Speeding up the increase in personal allowances would be a very poor trade off, as it was due to happen anyway.

I hope to be convinced the party has got something in return that is both sound economically and politically saleable. If not then I fear it will be the last straw for many in the party sceptical of the leadership and the coalition.

Lib Dems to back abolishing 50p tax rate?

Newsnight reports that Lib Dem MPs are to back Conservative budget plans to abolish the 50p tax rate for those earning over £150,000 per annum. Newsnight claimed that Lib Dem MPs couldn't stop it happening and would be rewarded by further moves to raising the tax threshold towards £10k.

If true, one can only despair at the concept of confirming people's worst fears about this government at the price of doing something that was going to happen anyway.

But then over the last two years Clegg and the Lib Dem leadership have never failed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory on almost every single issue of public concern.

Economically illiterate, politically naive and fundamentally irrresponsible...

...that's my view of the 10 Liberal Democrats who put their name to a Guardian letter supporting the frankly bonkers Compass think tank's 'plan B'.

The plan is crazy - calling for a UK tobin tax on banking transactions. It also calls for rises in benefits to help those on 'low and middle incomes' and additional quantitative easing (presumably on top of that just announced by the Bank of England). And finally for an end to all public spending cuts and job losses. And the report is unspecific about how much this would cost - but presumably it would be a lot more than the additional tax revenues (if any) so created.

Liberals shouldn't be arguing for a welfare state so bloated it encompasses those on middle incomes - nor for a tax that without coordinated international action is guaranteed to send the finance sector offshore.

And as for the idea that the public sector has contracted over the past year - today's growth figures reveal the government and other services sector grew by 0.5% in Q3 of 2011. Full details can be found here. In fact over the next four years government spending is set to rise by £40bn.

And by going public in the way they have the 10 Lib Dems have allowed themselves to become Labour's patsies and have given the media the opportunity to embarrass the party and create division where none exist. Some of the 10 ought to know better whereas Linda Jack and Richard Grayson have form.

The irony is that the 10 are some of those who have argued for a looser 'supply and confidence' arrangement instead of full blown coalition with the Conservatives. Under these circumstances the party would have been expected to support a Tory only budget - rather than one with strong Lib Dem strands running through it.

More budget alarm clock nonsense from Clegg

Just received an e-mail from Nick Clegg about the budget. It highlights some of the good things about the budget - increases in personal allowances, green investment, clamping down on Tory backbenchers er non-doms etc.

But it continues with the utterly excreable use of 'alarm clock Britain'. This is a phrase of stunning uselessness. It is so poorly devised it comes across as insulting, aloof and out of touch – the sort of desperate clever-dicked attempt that the minders of Gordon Brown tried but which spectacularly backfired and made him see even more removed from reality than he actually was. It is so bad it doesn’t even get laughed at in the pub – it raises hackles.

Clegg is better than this. When given the platform he can talk directly and engagingly to people without spin and the sort of garbling of language that these frightfully clever policy wonks and PR gurus seem to think help. It doesn’t - it gets in the way and further damages Clegg's already shredded reputation.

There is a simple test in these matters. Would your average Focus editor grace it on their pages? If the answer is no then don’t do it. And I know of no Focus editor who is prepared to grace this nonsense in print.

Stop it now Nick.

Budget 'giving with one hand and taking with the other'

Ed Miliband's pre-prepared attack on the budget was very keen to stress that it was 'giving with one hand and taking away with the other'. He claimed 'It's the classic Tory con.'

Ed Balls has been touring the TV studios saying similar.

Yet isn't this simply a definition of a revenue neutral budget?

And given the budgets his party produced over the last 13 years were giving to the current generation with one hand and taking it from future generations with the other - a few revenue neutral budgets along the way would have been a good thing.