The Chancellor marshalled his thoughts: "Well I'm not sure that is the document, but if he wants to hand it over I'll have a look." The hope was clearly that Mr Balls had been palmed off with a bowdlerised version of the growth strategy, with all the sexy bits removed.
Mr Osborne counter-attacked, claiming to possess Mr Balls's own "document", listing all the spending commitments entered into by Labour, which showed that the shadow Chancellor could not even control his own comrades.
Mr Balls laughed and gave the impression that he was enjoying himself. He takes a connoisseur's interest in everything to do with the Treasury, and no one could accuse him of a lack of fighting spirit.
The shadow Chancellor is one of the few the Opposition front benchers who convey a genuine relish for the task of destroying the Government. It is touching to see how easily Mr Balls is pleased: every time he thinks of Mr Osborne being forced to downgrade the growth forecasts, he grins.
Jacob Rees-Mogg (C, North-East Somerset) rose to Labour cheers. The class warriors on the Opposition benches find Mr Rees-Mogg a comforting figure: a walking anachronism who sounds 100 years out of date, so must be ridiculously easy for them to defeat. But if one ignores Mr Rees-Mogg's Wodehousian exterior, he also tends to sound as if he knows what he is talking about. He said the Government's economic strategy was "absolutely right", as could be seen from the gilts market's reaction, and added that, as usual, a Conservative Government was left with task of clearing up "an economic mess left by socialists".
Mr Balls laughed so merrily that his shoulders shook. It amuses him to be called a socialist, and he is certainly not going to admit that he and his master, Gordon Brown, left the economy in a mess.
To judge from the replies given by Mr Osborne and his colleagues, a great part of the Chancellor's argument in the Budget will rest on the contention that pretty much everything bad or painful which is now happening to us is still Labour's fault. Nowhere is this more true than on the vexed question of fuel prices. Mr Osborne emphasised that Labour "left six fuel increases in the pipeline", which means "now they're wriggling desperately to find some excuse to get themselves off the hook they left themselves on".
Mr Balls's front bench colleague, Angela Eagle, said the rise in VAT was putting 3p on the price of a litre of petrol, and called for this to be reversed: "Just do it!"
Mr Osborne's colleague, Justine Greening, pointed out that to reduce VAT on petrol alone would be "illegal": the European Union would not allow it.
Peter Bone (C, Wellingborough) took up this thought and said the answer was to pull out of the EU. Another of Mr Osborne's colleagues, David Gauke, agreed that this was logically correct: "To be fair, if VAT is the way ? to reduce the tax on fuel, that's what you have to do."
But neither the Government or the Opposition is ready to contemplate such a revolutionary step. Mr Gauke's purpose was not to condemn the EU, but to condemn Labour for thinking that the way to cut petrol prices was to reduce VAT on fuel: "Maybe it's not the best way to do it."
Helen Goodman (Lab, Bishop Auckland) tried another line of attack against Mr Osborne: that his Budgets take money "from women to be given to men".
Mr Gauke said this was "pretty desperate stuff" and the Government's policies are "in the interests of the entire country". But it is easy enough to foresee that Labour will attack the Budget for allegedly favouring men over women.
Tom Brake (Lib Dem, Carshalton and Wallington) sought to cheer his Lib Dem colleagues by asking how many people will be lifted out of income tax altogether by 2015. Mr Osborne declined to be specific, but evidently has a plan for winning the next election. It is called tax cuts.
today news more today news latest news more latest news latest business news
No comments:
Post a Comment