George Osborne concluded his statement by saying that his budget was a practical expression of the coalition’s commitment to behave as “a progressive alliance governing in the national interest”. One could see this as yet another exercise in political cross dressing – the Con-Dems claim the mantle of progressivism at the same time as they implement a rather conventional Tory cuts programme. Quite why a smaller state is in any sense “progressive” was never explained. Nor did Mr Osborne recognise that those countries with better social outcomes and similar economic performance to the UK all have larger states. This is ideological conviction sailing under the flag of economic necessity.

The government had already announced the end of the Future Jobs Fund, Labour’s excellent programme that guaranteed a job for any young person unemployed for more than six months. And the Child Trust Fund had also been swept into the dustbin of history, even though it was entirely consistent with the desire of Philip Blond and the so-called Red Tories to “recapitalise the poor”. The record since 6 May already suggested that the Cameroonian rhetoric of fairness was nothing more than a smokescreen. The budget has confirmed that judgment. Apparently the route to growth and recovery is to penalise the vulnerable and reward the corporate sector. How is it progressive to abolish the health in pregnancy grant or the sure start maternity grant for all but the first child? How can it be fair to freeze child benefit for the next three years? Why is it in the national interest to assume that citizens in receipt of welfare payments (like the disability living allowance, for example) are lazy, feckless malingerers? For those of us who have vivid memories of the 1980s this all sounds depressingly familiar.

This sense of déjà vu is reinforced by the VAT increase -the centrepiece of Mr Osborne’s statement. Geoffrey Howe did something very similar in his first budget after the 1979 election. The Lib Dems were right to say before the general election that VAT is a regressive Tory tax. Perhaps they can explain why views they held so strongly only a matter of weeks ago have now been abandoned? I am not quite as cynical as Harriet Harman, suggesting that principles have been abandoned for 22 government limousines, but it does seem that something has been sacrificed to get Lib Dem feet under ministerial desks.

More than anything else, this budget is reckless, both economically and politically. Apparently, the VAT increase, the cuts in welfare spending and the planned cuts in departmental budgets are “unavoidable”. Nobody (or nobody respectable) takes the view that no cuts are necessary. All the political parties are committed to a process of fiscal consolidation. But timing, judgment and a commitment to fairness are everything. On each of these measures the coalition has been found wanting. Despite what Mr Osborne said the global economy remains fragile, economic stimulus policies remain essential and a rapid retrenchment of public spending across the world will certainly lead to a double dip recession. Austerity policies are back with a vengeance in the eurozone. All governments are cutting spending. If we expect growth in Europe to offset the cuts in public spending in the UK then we may have to wait a long time for a strong economic recovery. To suggest, as the coalition does, that a failure to act now will turn the UK into a sadder and larger version of Greece is simply risible. Rachel Reeves MP has offered an elegant rebuttal of this argument here. Ministers are talking nonsense and the opposition should not allow them to get away with it.

Moreover, no British government has managed to put the public finances in order using the mix of 80% spending cuts and 20% tax increases. The damage to the social fabric could be serious and long-term. Of course, progressive Lib Dems will point to the levy on banks’ balance sheets, the maintenance of capital investment, the modest improvements to the child tax credit and the increase in the income tax threshold . But we should not be in any doubt. This is a Tory budget driven by a mystical faith in the wondrous properties of a smaller state. Labour’s task is to expose these realities and offer a credible alternative – and do it fast.