The PM uses the 'C' word: 'Cuts'

What asset sales? There's nothing left.

Browns quite correct about growth, yet he is doing nothing to promote it.

State-based initiatives can be starting points, but since state-based is, by its very definition, a net destroyer of wealth and growth due to it being funded by taxation, it isn't the answer.

We need a streamlined, reduced tax system, that rewards businesses who employ and pay tax in the UK so we can attract investment, drive down unemployment and increase tax revenue by taking a smaller slice from a greater number, having less people on benefits and more people paying income tax.

Browns problem, and Labours truth be told, is that it cannot see this very simple economic fact. Increased borrowing and investment in pubic services during a time of economic decline is a suicide note. It'll reward certain industries certainly, but at the cost of driving others out of the UK.

This is the very core of why Labour always exit power with greater unemployment than they inherited, and why the economy always worsens under them. This isn't to say the Tories are so great, but Labour fails to have a basic understanding of what makes an economy tick, the Tories for all their faults at least understand that.

As for Browns claims of honesty, he has only himself to blame for being seen as dishonest. His own actions have displayed him to be a man of little integrity, having sold it in exchange for political power. His use of unelected peers in cabinet, his reliance on people like McBride and Nick Brown to enforce his actions and damage his enemies, his refusal to admit when he's been caught out and his constant refusal to be straight during PMQ's all mark him out as someone not worthy of trust.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Asset sales? What, like Royal Mail, perhaps?

From your esteemed colleague Mr Peston:

"...the first secretary says it looks impossible right now to sell a sizeable chunk of Royal Mail at a price and on terms that would secure value for the taxpayer."

Asset sales? Aye, right.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Obviously it is painful for him to admit, in the face of the facts presented by Cameron.

Don't forget that Gordon was the one who gave us the R word.
Inevitably, the nation will use the C word to describe Brown above all others.

Alphabet-Man Brown also gave us the U - in U-turn.

This is begining to descend into an absurd episode of Sesame Street.

Maybe we should refer to him as 'Big Bird' - or is that 'Bird Brain'?

2. Frank-Castle

Nice post F-C.

=

Yes Nicholas, people do care primarily about jobs and housing, but they are becoming increasingly educated about the wider picture too. Many thousands of us have our own debts and are learning the hard way what it brings with it and how unchecked spending brings long-term pain.

And what if that growth is slow in coming, jobs promised do not materialise and repossessions increase. Brown is putting it all on black and if it comes up red we're in the madhouse.

" ... the debate about debt, which he believes is obsessing the Westminster village, but not the country".

Once more showing just how hopelessly out of touch is Gordon Brown. I despair.

Just a thought: Brown talks about "investment" on one hand, and "asset sales" on the other.

Now all the world - except maybe Brown and his inner circle - knows that you "invest" in "assets".

So, let me see if I have this right? He is going to "invest" in assets at the same time as he is going to "sell" assets? And use the proceeds of the latter to (help) pay for the former?

Maybe it went past me a bit fast on that last bend, but if you sell assets to buy more assets then you are merely "replacing" not "investing"?

And if you are spending on current not capital account then you are not "investing" at all anyway, and its a lie to say you are?

Hmm.

Whichever way I look at it, I can't see how Brown can possibly be telling the truth.

But what do I know...?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"This is a debate he does not want to have, an interview he did not enjoy".

That's because Gordon Brown is both deluded and isolated. The scary thing, though, is that he is also meant to be running the country - a supposedly open democracy. But since Gordon Brown doesn't do democracy, he therefore doesn't do debate and he doesn't enjoy answering to a free press.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"When I point out that the OECD, the IMF and the Governor of the Bank of England all seem worried, he makes his key argument - that growth is the best answer to the problem of public debt."

===

Which he is doing his best to stifle by imposing an extra tax on jobs from next year.

Well, who would have thought that Grodon Brown was capable of such comedy, he says "I've always told the truth".

lol lol lol lol lol

I dont believe him, does anyone else? (other than you saga)

If anyone is interested I have developed a finely tuned method to ascertain when he's lying...Whenever his lips move!!!

well our recent governments have sold all our assets and now as a nation we are in debt up to our ears so whatever gordon decides to sell off can only be bad for the people of this country.
this is now a case of the haves having spent out expecting the have nots cover the bill.
sadly our leader still wont call a general election becouse he knows he would be on the unemployment line.

This is a Prime Minister we did not want to have and a government that refuses to go away.

If there are efficency savings that can be made, that the government are aware of, then why haven't they bloody made them already?!!!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"I've always told the truth"
Gordon Brown 01.07.09

Well Nick, if you're with him for three days, you can ask him whether he means by this:-

(i) Throughout my life I've told the truth. Not exclusively the truth, but there have been occasions when I've been truthful.

or

(ii) Everything I've ever said has been the truth.

and as far as "truth" is concerned, whether he accepts this to mean the quality or state of being true? And if so whether there are any of the following definitions of "true" that he is not prepared to confirm apply to his statement:-

1. In accordance with fact or reality

2. Not false or erroneous

3. In accordance with reason

4. In accordance with correct principles

5. In accordance with received standard

6. Genuine

7. Not spurious, or hybrid, or counterfeit or merely apparent

8. Accurately conforming to

I appreciate that one shouldn't have to ask such questions of a serving Prime Minister, but he will be aware how much his reputation would soar if he is able to confirm that he means the same thing by this statement as that which he expects us to believe he means.

Honestly, I wish Brown would make up his mind about what his numbers are? Which truth is it? The first, second or third version?

https://cogitodexter.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/i-wish-gordon-would-make-up-his-mind-about-truth/

It's pretty obvious why he doesn't want the debate - he doesn't want the reality to sink in with the voters rather he wants them to believe all is rosy with Labour's figures and isn't with the Tories', despite the fact that his own official figures show capital spending is going to have to be reduced. No wonder he's uncomfortable - he's caught in a trap of his own making now.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Why is he surprised...when his own lieutenant...

ED BALLS TOLD A BLATANT LIE YESTERDAY!

Talking Balls

https://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3725688/talking-balls.thtml


(still...I suppose he's only following his boss' example)

In my opinion, Brown is devoting far to much time and effort on Fiscal Stimulus.

In his quest to hit the Political G spot, he inadvertently hit the R spot
which will ultimately result in a C section for public services.

We need a Prime Minister, not a fiddler on the roof.
Brown needs to take his hands out of his pockets and clean up his mess.

Good post from Nick (for a change!) There is an argument for higher spending now to try to bring the recession to an end sooner but it would mean bigger cuts later. Trouble is, Brown can't make the argument very well because he is dishonest about the spending cuts that will have to be made in any event

Well said #2 and #11

"Out of touch" is mild. I'm so astounded, I'm lost for words...

25. At 9:11pm on 01 Jul 2009, sagamix

In answer to your question.

Yes.

It is all part of my plan.

You need to read between the lines.
The truth is out there.

2 Frank Castle

Excellent post.

I remember recently Barak Obama saying something similar to the gist of your post, about the US economy along the lines that the government cannot be the main economic driving force, the ecomomy has to be driven by businesses creating the wealth. Gordon Brown however believes that the state is everything. His new best friend has a fundamentally different approach.

I watched Jeff Randall on Sky this evening. Great programme nightly - cutting edge - cutting being the operative word.

Tonight he had David Smith of the Times, or is it Sunday Times, and a prof of economics from Edinburgh. Smith was more scathing but both said large cuts in investment and large rises in tax. Both were eloquent and persuasive, something that Gordon Brown isn't with his 0% growth.

Our national debt is increasing by the day because we are spending more than we earn. The equation needs balancing, either by more income from tax or less expenditure by cuts.

I would like to know what action bloggers propose, there's always the chance that our ideas of what to cut could take root where it counts. So what should be cut? Where could more tax revenue be squeezed from?

It is my belief that the public sector is massively inefficent and that the same service could be provided in many areas for far les money, I would remove a layer of box ticking bureaucracy across the board.

I was interested in Digby Jones comments, they echo my own thoughts and are sentiments I have seen in others posts. I think action from the next government on the public sector pension timebomb is an absolute must.

Assets sales ?

The swindlers who conned the emperor is using some of the loot to buy public assets, probably cheaply.

The 'spending will go up by 0%' gaff...along with the 'we have saved the world' gaff...will go down in gaffing history as far as the HoP and Hansard recording these comments is concerned.

Once can be counted as a slip of the tongue...but twice...and you start to lose a bit of credibility...tut, tut!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

He is a LIAR, and not a very good one at that.

I look forward to this comment being modded off a couple of days after it was deemed acceptable,for being off topic.

I assume Mandy didn't have time to cast his eye over my comments before one of the underlings approved them.BBC you are a disgrace.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I've never found politicians to be very truthful, but I think this was just an honest mistake. Why so worked up over it?

He is talking about investing in the future in another article, so I don't see why we should hang on his every word.

Britain must invest in next generation - PM

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I too have 'always told the truth' but not 'all the time'*.

Just like Gordon Brown, according to Tom Bowers unauthorised biog of Brown.

Bowers claims just after the Ecclestone Affair, where Brown gave an interview where at some point he er, fibbed, and Brown later ran down a Whitehall corridor screaming "I lied, I (profanity) lied" .

Which at least demonstrates that he was'nt happy about lying.

I think that Brown, along with the rest of them, tries the tell the truth when the consequences of doing that are not too politically damaging.

Realistically, that is about the best we can hope for.

* As a teen-ager, I arrived home in a terrible state and told my mother I had eaten some dodgy sandwichs from a vending machine. In fact, sharing a bottle of whisky with a chum, I had downed half of it in about 40 minutes. Of course, she soon found out the truth, I got very little sympathy indeed and was left to rot. So, I discovered the hard way that lying is not a very sensible course of action. Also, I dinnae drink whisky nae more.

To be honest I don't care who Nick R likes or dislikes. I don't like GB being allowed to get away with his lies. Watching PMQT (it only has one extra letter notice!) today I was amazed how ineffective he was but even more so at how the half hour is wasted by petty little side comments that have little to do with information and much more to do with time wasting. He wouldn't even answer a question from his own side about nationalisation of the railways. Dodge, dodge and dodge again. I am ashamed of our political correspondents who fail to get stuck in, but am totally exasperated with opposition leaders failing to hammer it home.

I'll try again I recommend the FT Britain has sunk itself deep into a fiscal black hole .It tells you the tax increases necessary to fill the gap in our finances.
https://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e8d6b4c6-659d-11de-8e34-00144feabdc0.html

If you are with GB I only want to know one thing where did all the money go
explain by proper variance analysis but I guess he may not know what that is

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Hmmm, somebody on here is touchy about journalist Tom Bowers unauthorised biog of Gordon Brown because my post on the subject @ 41 was referred immediately.

Whatever.

Frank-Castle's contribution @ 2 is pretty accurate, in my opinion.

The Tories do seem to have slightly more idea than Labour on the economy.

Presumably because many Tories run or their family and friends run businesses and so can give immediate feedback on any proposed policies affecting business.

That is not an endorsement for the Tories, merely an observation.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

One last try and them I'm off again from bbc .
The problem is not just expenditure its revenue.The tax system as currently configured expects to get money from asset inflation (houses shares inheritance etc) It isn't going to be there people the goose is dead .So whoever has to sort this out (and I don't think the architect would ever change the design ) has no choice it's 5P on income tax and I don't know what that does to future growth other than it can't be good .
Good luck everyone!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Since all the bank robbers that have got away by simply walking out of the front doors of our nationalised banks (pockets bulging)...this petty government cannot even find the wisdom to pardon Ronnie Biggs, on his death bed, after serving 8 years in custody in an HM prison hospital.

Who would you trust most...Sir Fred Goodwin...Ronnie Biggs....or Gordon Brown?

They just don't geddit!

We can just about stomach the bank robbers....but the one thing we just can't stomach, are liars from planet Westmister!

While Brown was busily telling you that he was not a liar. He was in fact telling you another lie. From the spectator blog
"Brown was interrupted he said he meant to say 0.7% but was cut off after zero. As if. When it was pointed out to him that Brown said zero percent rise in 2013/14, and wasnt interrupted at all,"
So Nick will you be taking him to task for lying to you, directly to your face, will you?

A 0% increase, unbelievable.

The Nick Robinson interview has certainly helped to reveal the sleazy mis-information campaign at the heart of this dieing New Labour project. Pitty it is 11 years to late for the country's finances and economy.

I will however say that the policy of 'playing the man' by my lot; however tasteless (and it certainly is unpalatable) is only working because we do have reality on our side. The Pre-Budget report, and later published documentation has proven beyond doubt that there will be and must be cuts, and New Labour have already outlined this (privately)- it is time they stop treating people like me and others in the electorate like frought children and tell me what they plan to cut after the General Election.

...but will Mr Brown give up on his 'labour investment vs tory cuts' artificial debate? That I suspect will be the theme of New Labours G.E campaign if they are not careful.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Pilsden 49

yo make a very good point. There must be some level of re-orientation of the tax base. This was a hall mark of the 1979-1987 tory period in office where the sources of tax revenue was shifted from peoples hard earned pay packets to peoples actual spending. Perhaps another tax base restructuring is required to solve a possible long term problem.

We all need to remember Ireland, they have seen government revenues fall by 20% because their tax base is too heavily orientated upon the housing market (a bubble which has well and trully burst). Lets avoid having the same situation here; of falling governmental tax revenues and at the same junction increase in demand on government benefits during Browns recession.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#55 deanthetory

We've missed you over on "Blether with Brian"! some sensible Unionist input is desparately required!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

So,Gordon Brown is furious that his honesty and integrity are being questioned is he? Good!Might give him a taste of how I feel.

When has this wretched man ever been honest? As Chancellor? I think not.
He was just this miserable looking bloke in a badly fitting suit and a dodgy haircut,who sat scowling on the front bench,and for a time we didnt
take enough notice of what he was up to.He was spending half his time devising his beloved stealth taxes,and the other half plotting to oust Blair.

Since proclaiming himself as P.M.he has lurched from one disaster to another proving daily that he is unfit,inept and incompetent.

Principles,ethics,standards and morals are absent in Gordon,therefore we
quite rightly question his honesty.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

@33, I_Despise_Labour

You ask what can be done - a 5 to 10 year moratorium on foreign aid would allow us to to:

1) Remove income tax on those earning under 25k p.a. thus helping the poorer end of society and the self-employed
2) Set the annual tax-free allowance for those earning over 25k to 10k
3) Use the tax receipts of those earning over 25k to pay the debt and decrease borrowing.

All without altering current spending plans, and in a decade, once we've dug ourselves out, we can start the foreign aid again.

That's for starters.

And if anyone thinks stopping foreign aid would be cruel, remember much of it 'disappears' and rarely help the people it needs - the DfiD has become a cruel joke, making large bonuses for friends of Labour whilst doing minimal amounts to tackle poverty. It even deals with businesses who have some very dodgy practices towards the very people it's supposed to help.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Gordon is being about as honest as a £3 coin.

Don't care if it makes him mad - it makes me mad that he refuses an election and we will now not get an Autumn spending review.

Admit it Gordon - you've screwed my pension, you've screwed this country and you're going to do whatever it takes to stay in power.

And I'm pretty sure that if it becomes obvious that you're going to lose the next election (and isn't it obvious already?) you'll do your very best to make sure that the Conservatives inherit the biggest mess you can create.

Then you'll spend the next 10-15 years in opposition blaming the Tories for all your mistakes.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I trust Brown when it comes to the economy and public services...I definitely don't trust Mr Ten Percent...Cameron is just going to make the recession worse!!!

frank @ 2

state-based is, by its very definition, a net destroyer of wealth and growth due to it being funded by taxation

that's fundamentally incorrect - a person creates wealth (makes the rest of us richer) when the economic value of the work they do exceeds the amount they are paid to do it - makes no difference if it's public or private sector - what you say there ... especially the by definition bit ... is a very common clown misconception and it's my duty to nail it

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

What's the betting our ^Honest" unelected leader will make an appearance at Wimbledon at the weekend looking for some popularity spin-off from Andy Murray's success - don't be cynical though, he's not into celebrity, remember, he'd only be there to promote the country and help our international tourism growth by sticking his ugly mug on the telly

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Gordon Brown has performed so appallingly over the past year that it amazes me he is still in power.....but that's democracy for you! He has lurched from one crisis to the next and because they come so thick and fast no-one remembers what his last lunatic proposal was.
We are in for another year of unbelievable governance from one so out of touch. Financially, he will set us back a decade at least.
The real truth is that he doesn't know the truth. He can't remember what he has said or what his advisors are telling him.
There is no cunning plan but I think Baldrick may have a better idea than this self-deluded, ego-centric buffoon.

@76 sagamix

I'm sure you can highlight the profits the state is making then? The ones that would negate the level of borrowing and current spending deficit?

An individual is certainly capable of generating wealth within the public sector, I am certainly not arguing they can't, but once averaged out it always comes in at a negative. You can get outliers with budget surpluses, but those amount to little other than noise and frequently have political reasons rather than economic ones.

The state absorbs cash from the private sector, which is the true generator of a nations wealth and hence why it gets taxed. The world has tried purely state-based solutions, but finds that the sums don't add up, and the workers find their wages are artificially lowered as no ones competing for their skills. It's a little hard to fund schools and the like when funding is almost entirely composed of taxing the people you're paying...

Confusing airy theory with concrete reality is a very common clown misconception, and whilst it's not my duty to nail it, I occasionally do so out of a sense of charity.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Nick Robinson
You do have the power to interrogate GB more about what his fiscal plan is. I'll wager you £20 that you can't make him agree that his proposals all add up to at least a 10% cut in services 2010-11....
are you on?

Ok Nick .... I appreciate you are asleep and that £20 isn't worth chasing.... but if the Great Leader states his permanent position of truth maybe he could do a 'live' confession? Or is his moral compass built with 'God-defying' codes?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

To have growth you need strong business. To have strong business you need to cut red tape and not have punitive taxes.

What have Labour done? Increased red tape and cut VAT on everything but fuel. Now fuel prices are killing the economy but because the government is so obsessed with the green issue business has to suffer. With fuel way over 100p per litre we will continue to suffer.


Immediate cut in VAT on fuel would help many businesses and probably a cut in the excise duty too wouldn't be bad so that families have a bit extra to travel/have fun! Wow! Wouldn't that be novel!

Green energy will come to the UK but not under this current government. They do not support business sufficiently and the routes for new tech to penetrate the market are so difficult that you need to join associations/quango to even get a foot in the door - I know I work in renewable energy and we have new technology that would provide more than enough power for the country but to get to the right areas you need to be rubber stamped!

Brown is finished though so the sooner you recognise this and stop asking easy questions the better. We are done with him and tragically have to wait for his time to be up. Only 10 months to go!

You only need to look at the figures to see the truth..........erm theres already a thread about full figures not being made available now one has to wonder why if theres nothing to hide.....

Anyhow it was hilarious to see him stutter and stammer through PMQ's one day he might answer a question.....rather than spout the same old lines.

The economy is in the poorest shape its EVER been in.......and we know who is responsible and he can wriggle all he wants but hes chasing a lost cause.

People do care about the economy,because thats the very reason they have lost their jobs homes and pensions .It will be at least another Parliament and Government before we see any sort of recovery,having said that with little or no industry and our foreign industries retracting to home base we might never see a recovery.This might be as good as it gets....

#2 good post

There seem to be alot of contributors on here who have put their finger on Brown's achilles heel. Forget the insults, he has a basic deficiency which can never help this country build its way out of the hole he has created.

Brown is a centraliser; a man of the State who believes the State should control everything. If anyone still hasn't seen the regular article in Private Eye, "From the desk of the Supreme Leader", then look it out. It would be really funny if it wasn't so true.

Supported by Balls, he has 5 year plans, (not forgetting the latest 5 year teacher licence plan), and targets coming out of his ears and has lost touch with the reality of how the country works. As previously pointed out by various contributors, stop taking money from business, let them invest it in employment and watch the country grow again.

Surestart this....., tax credit that....., all 17/18 year olds stay at school, (temporarily reducing unemployment figure).....God help us. When will it all end? Honest Gordon and his gang will no doubt be producing their own newspaper shortly spinning the State's message. Maybe they could call it Pravda, (or has that been used somewhere before)?

Redistribution costs money, alot of money. For every pound we give the State it costs the machine a third of it to spend it. What a complete waste. Just don't take it in the first place!!!!! Please??!!?!

If the PM cannot get his head around giving decision making and return power back to the electorate locally then he should leave immediately IMHO.

me @ 72 sandwiched by frank @ 2 and 78

yes, but you pronounced that the state can't create wealth by definition didn't you? - that's a theory based assertion, hence my theory based reply was apposite - your assertion (although widely believed) is incorrect, that's all I'm saying

I have always define politicians as

"Self-serving professional liars"

By this definition Gordon Brown scores 100% in each category.

I have never, ever, known a politician in the UK who was so ambitious that he put himself so far ahead of his party and the Country.

And I have never known a PM who has lied so often and so vigorously to the British public.

His comment "I always tell the truth" will have been noted by St Peter for the day Brown ascends/decends into an abyss of his own making.

61 laughatthetories

I can remember when Aitken and Archer deservedly got their come uppance. Aitken's "sword of truth" speech was particularly bizarre. I think we all enjoyed seeing those two brought to justice !!!But it important to remember that neither of these people were primeminister, and that their creative view of the reality of their actions (can't use the L word) concerned their own personal activities and not the governing of the country which affects everyone. This does however make them not fit to govern certainly.

Brown may not be as bad as these two, but that's not saying very much. Just because he isn't in prison doesn't mean that we have to believe everything he says. I don't tust him or believe anything he says now.

As for mentioning Mark Thatcher, whats that about ? He isn't and never has been in politics or government, let alone PM. I'm no fan of his but his activities, whatever they may be, don't affect the country to the extent Gordon Browns do. Just an fairly dismal attempt from you to smear his mum by association I suppose ......

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Asset sales must be spin-speak for raising more loans. Debt, Debt, debt has to be the catch phrase for Nulabour now.

Why are you reporters all so straight faced? All so bright - smart if you like but .....

I was listening to the responses Lord Mandelson of Foy was NOT giving to the PM programme yesterday on the Royal Mail and imagined myself as the questioner, Nicholas.

The Lords replies were so odd the word "honesty" in the thread below seems oddly placed. Is that part of it? An MoP life? He or she cannot say what is what - but what must be - today only - subject to checking back with head office and what may have been said elsewhere?

My goodness. I would become Harpo Marx were I an MoP - just to be on the safe side.

I will stick with anagrams. They mean not a thing you know?

Subject: A reform to make our skies safer
Anagram: Smart karaoke fie U - SFO remorse

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Morning nick nice to see you have some warm weather over there So its c word for cuts is it ?Its a pity brown can't put the cut into his final few months left in power then we would celebrate with a large beer.For example how about a general election next week? never going two happen though i watched your interview with him on the train to leicester my home town.How pathetic his answers were same old rubbish hes completely lost it .How can this bunch of misfits can continue to run the country beggars belief Oh and by the way that jack straw fellow stooping the release of Ronnie biggs ,what a sham after all the fiddling that lot have been up to makes Ronnie look like Cinderella Are well one day soon the British public will be able to rid themselves of the rubbish,And the poor old torys will have one hell of a task in bringing some form of normality back to what was once a great country.But until the reform carry on up the creek.with no paddles.

So the PM now admits that he will make cuts, but wants us to believe that he's always been honest...

...the only 'C' word I'll use in future to describe Gordon Brown won't be 'cuts', although similarly it is 4 letters long and also contains a 'u' and a 't'.

There should be no tax rises or cuts in sevices to pay for the mistakes of the banks. the money loaned to them to keep them afloat should be clawed back each and every year till the dept is repayed,with interest.
Any bank that fails to keep up repayments the board and share holders will loose it and the goverment will sell it on to recoupe the money.

Thats what will happen if i default on my morgage, one rule for one, one rule for all, the banks must pay back the money.

The problem with Gordon Brown is that he honestly believes that he always tells the truth and everyone else is wrong.

When you start from that position you of course never tell a lie; it's a physiological problem.

Having been annoyed enough by the "young and privileged" blog to complain to the BBC, I would like to start by saying I found this a much more useful blog. Not because I am a Tory bigot, but because it is one of the few times that the incumbent Prime Minister has been pressed, even gently, to explain what he means. And many of the comments are a welcome return to thoughtful, constructive, debate.

BTW, if Brown always tells the truth, can you ask him for the full details of his leadership pact with Blair? Can you ask him if he still believes there is no more boom and bust? Can you ask him if he thinks it would have been wise to save a little more and spend a little less, between 2001-2007? Can you ask him if he thinks David Kelly was fairly treated? Can you ask him if he thinks his Cabinet is a shining example of democracy?

As to Brown's comment that people don't care about unknowable public expenditure in the future. This shows how out of touch and patronising he is.

P.S. Can some one please explain the difference between current and capital expenditure?

"I always tell the truth"

The man is about as deluded as they come.

It's not "I never lie", as in "I never knowingly tell untruths". No, Brown goes for "my word is gospel".

Re 86, saga and F-C.
You're both right to a degree. Any work done which produces an economic benefit greater than its economic cost is beneficial to society. The key difference between public sector work and private sector work is the motivation behind the work. Private sector work is necessarily based solely on economic benefit; public sector work has an element of societal (ie. non-economic) benefit. In other words, the public sector often chooses not to optimise the economic benefits in order to achieve some other goal (supporting the poor, the sick, victims of crime, etc.).

One can also think in terms of resource allocation. The private sector allocates resources according to a free market - anyone is free to bid any amount for any resource, and the highest bidder gets that resource. This maximises efficiency, but is not necessarily "fair" in our societal thinking of fairness. The public sector allocates resources on various other bases, such as greatest need (healthcare), or simple equality (rubbish collection). Hence the public sector can deviate from optimum economic efficiency.

One last thing - the private sector has a negative feedback mechanism built in, thanks to the free market, that acts against increases in inefficiency. A company that routinely overspends for services rendered will go bust, as other companies out-compete it, steal market share, secure more investment from investors who recognise the better efficiency and return on their capital, etc. The public sector does not have this natural feedback loop because it does not operate in a free market. There are not rival police forces competing with each other for tax revenue. The police force cannot go bust like a private sector service company might, because it would not be allowed to happen.

As a result of all of this, we choose to balance the more efficient (but socially careless) private sector with the less efficient (but more socially agreeable) public sector. But we must be clear what role the public sector plays. It's inferior to the private sector in driving growth.

"I've always told the truth" said the PM......

.......and Nick, you didn't laugh out loud in his face?

You could have responded to that with any of the following.....

"Really Prime Minister? As in you didn't go to the country in Autumn 2007 because of your lead reducing in the polls? That YOUR removal of the 10p tax band wouldn't adversely affect anyone? That you didn't break your promise to the British people to hold a referendum on the EU Constitution? That you knowingly stated that capital expenditure would continue to rise after 2011 when YOUR OWN FIGURES clearly stated it wouldn't?.......

The guy is so deluded he probably doesn't see any of the above as lies.