Over the past few months, you and your front-bench colleagues have given mixed and confusing messages on the economy and your plans for public spending.

In January, both you and David Cameron suggested that, if elected, the Conservatives would spend up to £30 billion per year less than Labour during 2010/11, yet only a month later Philip Hammond said your cuts would be “just over £1bn, £1.5bn, something like that”.

Meanwhile your figures on savings from the cutting Child Tax Credits and the Child Trust Fund have been exposed as inaccurate by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, leaving your spending pledges even more awry.

It is not clear to us whether these mixed messages are a deliberate attempt to obscure your plans or a symptom of a confused approach to policy but either way the public deserves better. Your party has put great store in its calls for openness and accountability in the management of the nations finances so you must match this with actions.

You have variously described your ‘first priority’ as protecting NHS and overseas budgets as well as avoiding the rise in National Insurance Contributions. As this rise in contributions would raise around £7bn per year, you can only pledge to scrap it by identifying savings or other means to raise revenue. But as you have not done this, it is yet another example of a pledge that lacks credibility.

You have also promised to “reverse the effects on pension savers of the 1997 abolition of the dividend tax credit for pension funds”. You must be aware that this has huge cost implications. For example, Martin Palmer, head of corporate pensions marketing at Friends Provident has estimated this promise alone “would cost the Treasury billions”.

The list of uncosted pledges, backed up by suggestions of widespread cuts one day, or virtually no changes the next, leaves the public confused and sceptical. In short, your recent record is a catalogue of contradictions.

Despite this confused approach, we accept that one area where you have been clear is on your plans to scrap support for those who find themselves out of work: the Future Jobs Fund, which provides 120,000 jobs for young people, the Young Person’s Guarantee of work or training so no young person is on the dole for over a year and the New Deal for lone parents which has helped over 625,000 move into work.

So even though you are giving out mixed and contradictory signals on important details of policy, it is clear that protecting employment is not a priority for you. It is therefore unsurprising that independent economists, such as Professor David Blanchflower, have estimated that under your plans unemployment could reach 5 million.

Whatever our party political differences, as we get closer to the election we believe that we all owe it to the public to present them with a fair and honest choice. The public should be told what your priorities really are and how they are to be paid for. Any party that seriously aspires to Government should do no less.

Paul Boateng
Alan Milburn
Andrew Smith

 

 

 

Photo: David McLear 2009